On Fri, Apr 06, 2001 at 03:31:56PM -0400, John Porter wrote: > Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote: > > So URLs are not > > literals, they have structure, and only thinking of them as filenames > > may be too simplistic. > > Yeah. But Rebol manages to deal with them. I doubt it. telephone:? fax:? lpp:? callto:? uuid:? If Rebol can handle all of those URL schemes, why bother with Perl in the first place? > I don't know if this is something we want to follow Rebol's > lead on, but it's something to look at. Sounds like if there's a 'use url;' clause in use, then the standard three (mailto:, http:, ftp:) might be available, whereas other URL schemes would need different declarations (use url::dns;). Z.
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 Jarkko Hietaniemi
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 Jarkko Hietaniemi
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 Dan Brian
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 Jarkko Hietaniemi
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 Dan Brian
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 John Porter
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 John Porter
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 Jonathan Scott Duff
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 John Porter
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 Simon Cozens
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 Adam Turoff
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 John Porter
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 Jarkko Hietaniemi
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 nick
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 Dan Sugalski
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 Richard Proctor
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 John Porter
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 nick
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 Jarkko Hietaniemi
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 Dan Brian