Re: About the Gnome Help browser
- From: Olof Oberg <mill pedgr571 sn umu se>
- To: gnome-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: About the Gnome Help browser
- Date: Tue, 24 Feb 1998 22:12:31 +0100
> You could do something like that, but the "://" indicates a remote
> host *always* (that's my understanding anyway). So, yes, we could
> allow "man://helpserver.foo.com/ls" but it would have to be translated
> (according to some configuration) to rewrite as something like
> "http://helpserver.foo.com/man.pl?ls" or whatever. That is, the
> "man:" at the front does not indicate any transport mechanism, it
> just indicates that I'm type in a shortcut to a man page and the
> help browser need to rewrite it to a full proper URL.
Section 3.1 in rfc1738 says that Common Internet Schemes use "://"
which is an indicator of direct use of an IP-based protocol. However
one of these - "file://" - is an exception. Section 3.10.
"The file URL scheme is unusual in that it does not specify an
Internet protocol or access method for such files; as such, its
utility in network protocols between hosts is limited."
So one could use something similar when implementing "man://".
Note that Netscape doesnt implement the file scheme correctly.
They allow file:/tmp for example when it should be file:///tmp.
Just like my suggestion to allow man://1/man instead of man:///1/man
is incorrect.
(side note: I think one can specify a specific protocol between the
slashes.)
> We can just use http or ftp for that. I'm hoping actually that
> it'll be user (system administrator) configurable, as in the
> example I just gave above. Simple rewrite rules for these
> "URL shortcuts" would allow this.
After reading about file: I tried it with Navigator (it actually works!)
and I could access a remote computer by specifying user and password.
I dont know what Navigator uses but ftp could be possible. Lynx uses
ftp.
Well I have picked up this mail again (started it 12h ago) and I think
a new scheme altogether might be the wrong way to go. Maybe using URN
resolution would be better. I will have to read up on the following
RFCs (1738, 2141, 2169, 1630) to have any worthwhile opinion on it.
Tomorrow I might have an idea.
/mill
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]