Posted by John Dunlop on 05/26/06 20:29

[This whole thread was off-topic from the start. Marked so now.]

robert:

> actually oli, iirc the rfc for href is for a URI and not specifically a
> URL...

Right, that's what the spec says.

> where the resource could be even something as non-url as a javascript
> function.

We're drifting here. Since javascript isn't a registered scheme
name, if you wanted to argue that you're still playing by the spec, the
first hurdle is to point to a specification for javascript URIs. Once
you've done that, ask why it hasn't been registered. :-)

[re: file:///C:/pictures/xyz.jpg ]

> i think this doesn't work because of the additional / after file://

I don't think so, robert. The slash separates the hostname (here,
implicit) from the path part. Not including it might cause problems
with strict interpreters, but including it... doubt it.

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1738.txt

--
Jock

• Next in forum: Re: "<br>" v "<br\>"
• Prev in forum: Re: How do I fetch an array of all field names in a mysql database?
• Thread view: |OT| file links in HTTP-fetched resources

[Reply to this message]