Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I observed that the parser calls the part after the host in a URL,
> "uri". This is quite incorrect; a URI is supposed to be a
> generalization of a URL, so it makes no sense to call that a URI.
I was wondering about that, but failed to go check :-(
>
I observed that the parser calls the part after the host in a URL,
"uri". This is quite incorrect; a URI is supposed to be a
generalization of a URL, so it makes no sense to call that a URI.
RFC 1738, section 3.1 calls that "url-path".
Are there objections to changing it at this time? The contr
