A quick question about file URLs

goran at krampe.se goran at krampe.se
Tue Nov 15 11:09:20 UTC 2005


Hi Michael!

Michael Rueger <m.rueger at acm.org> wrote:
> goran at krampe.se wrote:
> 
> > One thing that Michael and I disagree on (IIRC) is that my stance is
> > that the path in a FileUrl is always absolute. Michael has implemented
> 
> We only slightly disagree ;-)
> A valid file url according to http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1738.html is
> 
> fileurl        = "file://" [ host | "localhost" ] "/" fpath
> 
> which means it always has 3 / in it. Meaning file://xxxx.xx is not a 
> valid file url. Which means that file url can't be relative.

Right. No disagreement there.

> A uri can 
> be relative, as 'xxx.xx' is a valid relative uri. But, it is only useful 
> when resolved against an absolute one. 

Right. Ok, so then we don't disagree then I guess. Because I don't think
I have ever argued about URIs, only file URLs.

In fact, the whole RFC crap around URI/URLs etc is pretty amateurish
IMHO. Why do they keep coming up with "partial" RFCs that just "update"
the older ones etc? The only result is total confusion about which darn
RFC to read and how they overlap.

Give me a single RFC for URI/URL damnit that replaces *all* the old
crap. ;)

> Hey, we should make entries to the yearly Squeak event calender:
> 
> Spring - license discussion
> Summer = mailing list vs forum discussion
> Fall - absolute uri discussion
> Winter - ??

Mmmm, something really yummy for the long winter nights... How about...
(wait for the drum).... modules and namespaces!!! That's the real
killer.

regards, Göran



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list