Reply to post: Re-defining RFC3986

Official: Google Chrome 69 kills off the World Wide Web (in URLs)

EnviableOne Bronze badge

Re-defining RFC3986

Ok so the great Tim et. al defined the uri and included this:

Uniformity provides several benefits. It allows different types of resource identifiers to be used in the same context, even when the mechanisms used to access those resources may differ. It allows uniform semantic interpretation of common syntactic conventions across different types of resource identifiers. It allows introduction of new types of resource identifiers without interfering with the way that existing identifiers are used. It allows the identifiers to be reused in many different contexts, thus permitting new applications or protocols to leverage a pre-existing, large, and widely used set of resource identifiers.

So how can this one use case justify changing what are UNI-FORM across all other implementations, just to justify their drive to render 2/5 less charcters?

oh and what happens if something different is posted at abc.com and www.abc.com? is on my domain

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019