--- Kalin KOZHUHAROV <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Well, I am sure it is wrong URL, but took some time till I pinpoint it >in RFC1808. Otherwise it would be very difficult to code URL parser. >What you actually try to convince us is that you can omit the >net-location (i.e. usually comes in the middle) and still be able to
>From the rfc: |URL = ( absoluteURL | relativeURL ) [ "#" fragment ] | | absoluteURL = generic-RL | ( scheme ":" *( uchar | reserved )) | | generic-RL = scheme ":" relativeURL | | relativeURL = net_path | abs_path | rel_path | | net_path = "//" net_loc [ abs_path ] | abs_path = "/" rel_path | rel_path = [ path ] [ ";" params ] [ "?" query ] It is clear that if the string after the ":" does not begin with "//" or "/" then it is a relative path. >tell the location. Then how do you interpret http:program.com ? >Is it a site program in TLD com, or a .com (DOS executable) file served >who knows why via http? It does not have a // before the program.com so it is not a TLD. > >So one of the places this is discussed in RFC1808 is: > >4. Resolving Relative URLs >... > >Step 2b): If the embedded URL starts with a scheme name, it is > interpreted as an *absolute* URL and we are done. The rfc states that this is an example algorithm. It does not claim it is the definitive algorithm. >BTW, did you try to click in your browser on that link? Relative links beginning with "http:" work fine in Mozilla and Internet Explorer. Since Mozilla is designed for standards compliance they appear to interpret rfc1808 they same way I do. Gary _____________________________________________________________ Get your FREE E-mail @Gibweb.net. Visit www.GibWeb.net for Gibraltar weather,news,lottery results,search and much more.
