[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kfm-devel
Subject:    Re: Fwd: kfm not resolving URI correctly
From:       Dawit Alemayehu <adawit () earthlink ! net>
Date:       1999-03-21 21:27:39
[Download RAW message or body]

On Sun, 21 Mar 1999, David Faure wrote:
>On Sun, Mar 21, 1999 at 12:38:05PM -0800, Alex Zepeda wrote:
>> On Sun, 21 Mar 1999, Torben Weis wrote:
>> 
>> > Hmmmm, if that is really allowed then I can hack it the state machine of
>> > the new KURL ( coming soon ). But I wonder what protocol to choose ?
>> > Some magic stuff like looking at the first letters in front of the dot
>> > otherwise http ?
>> 
>> Hows about something similar to Netscape:
>> 
>> if it's a local file, use that (for this purpose // = /)
>> 
>> if it starts with www., try an http connection
>> ftp., ftp protocol
>> x., x protocol
>> 
>> If it matches none of these, try web.
>
>Hmmm. I agree with such hacks for URLs entered by the user (patch from
>Dawit A. about this will soon be applied).
>But NOT for links, which IMHO should always be very clear.
>If the RFC says //www.kde.org is allowed, it probably also says that this
>means http and nothing else, right ? Could someone check ?

No.  It means any URL.  For example if the URL was //ftp.kde.org instead, it
would still be a valid URL.  The scheme ( or commonly called the protocol )
used here should be "ftp" (derived from the user's entry ), but if one cannot
easily determine what the protocol to use should be, in such cases where there
is no www. or ftp. or news. ( //slashdot.org ), then the steps outlined in RFC
1808 section 3 - Establishing Base URL  and section 4 - Resolving Relative URL's
should be followed.  I am not going to repeat what this RFC says because it
is rather long ( if interested, please look at http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1808.html ).
IMHO, this is what RFC 1808 states.

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]