Re: Dumb moniker questions (was Re: Bonobo dependencies ...)

[Joe Shaw <joe helixcode com>]

> > My opinion is that using the octothorpe for accessing anchors
> > in the HTML should be escaped somehow, so you could do:
>  
>         I'm being dumb again, but what interface do you want to get from
> these anchors ?

If you're using a browser, you can't simply ignore that they may be
pointed at an anchor. This may only be useful against a Control moniker,
but I could see it returning a Stream of only that anchor (or perhaps the
rest of the HTML file starting at that anchor). I'm not saying that an
anchor should be a whole different moniker but that the http moniker
should do The Right Thing when given one.

> > http://www.foo.com/stuff.html\#anchor1
> > or
> > http://www.foo.com/compress.html.gz#gzip:
> 
>         Again, what if my html is not coming via. an http transport; this
> approach looks strange to me.

Hmm. Good point. file:///home/joe/stuff.html\#anchor would be valid, but I
can see how that would somewhat hard to parse.

Joe