To: John Curran <jcurran@nic.near.net>
Subject: Re: Current URN syntax is unacceptable
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 23 Oct 1994 07:14:22 EDT."
<aacff45502021004e74e@[192.52.71.147]>
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 1994 15:58:32 -0700
From: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@avron.ICS.UCI.EDU>
Message-Id: <9410231558.aa25550@paris.ics.uci.edu>
John Curran <jcurran@nic.near.net> writes:
> Is there a common URI syntax? I remember vocal debates about everything
> to the right of the scheme tag being "opaque"... Are you indicated that
> you believe that all URI-class objects will have a common syntax that can
> be applied prior to scheme recognition?
Where there is no need for divergence, I think a common syntax should
be applied. Scheme recognition is still required, but a common syntax
reduces the cognitive workload of humans as well as machines. Besides,
there is also a technical reason -- a completely colon-separated syntax
makes it impossible to use partial forms. While I do not yet know that
partial forms are desirable, I do know that it would be foolish to make
them impossible without a clear reason for doing so. No reason has been
given for switching to a colon-separated syntax.
> (I don't mind the change, but would rather not have capricious changes to
> meet potentially non-existance consistency belief...)
Which is exactly why I am against making capricious changes to the URI
syntax.
......Roy Fielding ICS Grad Student, University of California, Irvine USA
<fielding@ics.uci.edu>
<URL:http://www.ics.uci.edu/dir/grad/Software/fielding>