Re: [Castle-users] assembly includes

[Alex Henderson]

So… in conclusion… what’s the “winning” uri format that I should implement? ;o)  I’ve lost track of the popular choice now.   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Craig Neuwirt Sent: Friday, 2 June 2006 10:25 a.m. To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Castle-users] assembly includes   Urls are a little more restrictive than  Uris, but I agree with you.  It make make more sense to follow the original suggestion. On 6/1/06, hammett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: The schema is part of the uniform resource location specification. I think we should stick with it the best we can... The only reason I created the CustomUri is that the Uri class has a different behavior on .net 1.1 and 2.0 (and possibly on mono). On 6/1/06, Craig Neuwirt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > hmm, Can we alter the CustomUri parsing to accomodate it without the ://? > Otherwise the url looks a little funky.  I'll take a closer look at the > code. -- Cheers, hammett http://www.castleproject.org/~hammett _______________________________________________ CastleProject-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/castleproject-users

_______________________________________________
CastleProject-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/castleproject-users