[Doc-SIG] What counts as a url?
Tony J Ibbs (Tibs)
Fri, 16 Mar 2001 11:23:19 -0000
Edward D. Loper wrote:
> So I'm working on adding HREFs to STminus. They look like this::
> "anchor name":URL
> Where URL is either a relative URL or an absolute URL.. So I went
> and looked up "RFC 2396":http://www.w3.org/Addressing/rfc2396.txt .
> It suggests (if I'm reading it correctly) that we could define
> a URL as::
> ([a-zA-Z0-9-_.!~*'();/?:@&=+$,#] | %[0-9a-fA-F][0-9a-fA-F])+
Ah - do we want URLs or URIs? I can never remember the difference.
I am loathe to stop people from using the full generality of "pointers
to the web", and this means delving into nasty stuff. See
for some interesting details. I think we need to avoid that.
> Should we use that regexp for URLs? Or perhaps we should go for
> simplicitly, and say that the regexp ends at whitespace::
> In either case, we'll have to be careful to say::
> See "this":http://url .
> instead of::
> See "this":http://url.
Hmm, that breaks with ST tradition, and indeed my code treats that final
"." as not being part of the URI. Hmm.
> Is that a problem? If so, what can we do about it?
> (Keep in mind that it *is* acceptable to have a URL that ends in a
I'll think on it, for my part (and read some specs).
> Of course, I don't think people will be including HREFs in their
> documentation much, anyway.. So the main issue for most people
> will just be that they can't use '":' in certain environments..
Erm, I wouldn't bet on that. And we *are* trying to retain
compatibility/usefulness as a tool for working on text files as well,
remember, where this sort of thing is more likely.
Tibs (slightly worriedly)
Tony J Ibbs (Tibs) http://www.tibsnjoan.co.uk/
"How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive
continuity of ducks." - Dorothy L. Sayers, "Gaudy Night"
My views! Mine! Mine! (Unless Laser-Scan ask nicely to borrow them.)