[10195] in www-talk@info.cern.ch
Re: URL parsing and IPv6 addresses
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ka-Ping Yee)
Wed Aug 7 22:23:15 1996
Date: Wed, 07 Aug 1996 11:08:18 +0900
From: Ka-Ping Yee <kpyee@aw.sgi.com>
To: Kim <bookwyrm@agii.solluna.org>
Cc: www-talk@w3.org
Resent-From: www-talk@w3.org
Kim wrote:
>
> My inclination is still to use a second "::" to separate the port
I don't know. Looks like too many colons to me. Why can't we just
pick another character to separate the port number?
Like, say, a comma.
Let's see. The allowable non-alphanumeric characters in URLs are
(from RFC 1738)
+ - = . _ / * ( ) , @ ' $ : ; & ! ?
... i believe. So right away we know [] is bad.
> (It may just be me, but I
> don't like the idea of common shell characters being used in URL's.
I can certainly empathize with that. *.();&!?'$ all do something
to the shell, and / is no good, so that leaves
+ - = . _ , @ :
If we want to avoid _ and -, which are already used in hostnames,
and . and : for IP addresses, that leaves
+ = , @
I think any of these four characters would work fine. We might
want to shy away from the @ which is already used to separate
usernames in ftp URLs, but i don't see anything wrong with the
other three. My suggestion is the comma, only because + and =
conjure up mathematical analogies that don't fit with the idea
of a port number.
How about it?
Ping
