On 04/10/2006 11:39 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote: >
> > > No arguing about your veto. I just try to understand it better to address it. > > So some questions: > > 1. As I just learned from RFC3986 an empty path is allowed (I was not aware > of this > before). But why do we set r->uri to "/" in this case? Shouldn't it be > NULL too > in this case? Ok. Forget about this. This was just answered. Regards Rüdiger
