Text 780, 57 rader
Skriven 2007-03-28 23:34:18 av Scott Little (3:712/848)
    Kommentar till text 753 av Mithgol the Webmaster (2:5063/88)
Ärende: Fidonet URL syntax
==========================
 [ 24 Mar 07 08:30, Mithgol the Webmaster wrote to Scott Little ]


 MW> I know that echomail area is intended to be a message echo. However, I
 MW> can't ignore the fact that UUE-encoded content is common nowadays.
[snip]
 MW> We don't need any synthetic structure for the sake of structuralism of
 MW> anything ideal; the need of object-path is dictated by the reality.

Placing a file as a direct subordinate of a message echo is already synthetic
and has nothing to do with reality.  File attachments are subordinate of the
message not the echo, so the only logical way to address them is by linking the
message first, then the subobject.

area://tag/msgid/partid or area://tag?searchfile=filename is logically sane. 
area://tag/filename is nonsense.


 MW> not going to invent a tool to bundle off the UUE encoders. Who needs
 MW> an URL standard that is not even able to address the files inside
 MW> echoes like Fido7.Sound.UUE, Star.Wars.UUE, inside some gamers' echoes
 MW> with additional levels, et cetera?

Who needs a URL scheme that is broken, nonsensical and nonexpandable by design?


 MW> Though, however, I am still in doubt about whether something like that
 MW> is really needed.

Is FidoML really needed? ;)


 MW> What is more common: different echoes with the same name, or echoes
 MW> that are gated across domains so that the echo name persists?

Othernets typically prepend their network name to every echo tag to ensure
uniqueness.  If not for that, there'd be plenty of conflicting tags.

I haven't seen any gated echos for a loooong time.. most echos prohibit it, and
othernets typically exist to provide their own flavour, not simply as an
extension to Fidonet distribution.

 MW> probably should just introduce the same 'uplink' optional parameter in
 MW> 'area://' scheme that was already introduced in another scheme
 MW> ('areafix:') ÄÄ and with an additional note that the conforming
 MW> Fidonet browsers should prefer uplinks from the same domain, even if
 MW> they can't access the exact node designated in the optional parameter.
 MW> Would you be satisfied then?

uplink aids areafixing, but isn't suitable for uniquely identifying echo tags
across networks.


-- Scott Little  [fidonet#3:712/848 / sysgod@sysgod.org]

--- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20070116
 * Origin: Cyberia: Come get some. (3:712/848)