file:/ vs file://<host>/ vs file:///

[Glenn McGrath]

On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 10:42:36 +0000
Dave Cridland <dave at cridland.net> wrote:

> On Fri Nov  5 00:01:55 2004, Glenn McGrath wrote:
> > Why dont you stand up and do what you know is right rather than what
> > your told is right.
> > 
> > 
> Ah, indeed. Personally, I feel that XML would be better 
> case-insensitive - should I write my XML files case insensitively, or 
> should I follow existing specifications? According to you, I should 
> do my own thing, because I know I'm right.

If a lot people thought XML should be case-insensitive and a minority of
peopel were prevting it from changing then i think you and the rest of
the majority should go and do your own thing.

> Common sense suggests that 
> invention and arbitrary alteration of specifications is a 
> stupendously dumb thing to do, however, since it breaks 
> interoperability.

Your talking about avoiding long term solutions in order to protect
against short term problems.

Specifications and standards should only be seen as a guide, how can
they ever evolve and improve if people blindly follow them.

If the file-uri-spec is just stating what RFC1738 says then why is it
needed ?

Why is is it called -uri- if it only follows the url RFC, why not be
more accurate and call it the file-url-spec.

If you cant see that file:/<path> is a better solution then i think you
arent looking at the issue logically.

Clearly discussing this isnt going to change anything, so im out of
here.



Glenn