[SAGA-RG] spec

[Ceriel Jacobs]

Andre Merzky wrote:
> Quoting [Thilo Kielmann] (Dec 13 2007):

>> The motivation for relative paths is: an absoute path immediately
>> becomes a URL, (well, a URL-shaped string)
> 
> Why is that?  
> 
>   tmp/data.bin   <-- relative
>   /tmp/data.bin  <-- absolute
> 
>   http://localhost/tmp/data.bin   <-- relative

Well, according to RFC 1738 it is, but RFC 1738 has been superseeded by RFC 2396,
which in turn has been superseeded by RFC 3986. Both of these consider the above
an absolute URI, with an absolute path "/tmp/data.bin".

>   http://localhost//tmp/data.bin  <-- absolute

Yes, but the second '//' is equivalent to '/'.

And, the idea is: "relative path", not "absolute URI with relative path".

> There is no real difference here in appearance, apart from
> the slash leading the path element of the URL.  I say its
> confusing to allow one form but not the other.

Thilo's suggestion allows neither. He only wants to allow relative \emph{path}s,
which I agree is the cleanest solution.

Cheers,		Ceriel