> That's true. But & is definitely the one used by convention. (Maybe it' > s > in the CGI spec? Not sure on that one.) And that doesn't change the fact > that this in this case ':' was used in place of both the '?' and the > '&', which is definitely wrong.
No, it's just a different way of naming the path segment. Any http resource is free to construct its own namespace with the exception that "/" and "?" have a reserved meaning *when* they are used. ....Roy
