On Wed, Apr 04, 2001 at 07:35:03AM -0500, Steven Hazel wrote: > Tavin Cole <tavin at mailandnews.com> writes: > > > Great idea, although I think we should take advantage of the fact > > that we're now reserving // to indicate metadata processing in a URI > > and try to avoid making up meta keytypes. So instead the date-based > > URI should look like a normal KSK or SSK followed by // and > > something that signifies date-based URI rewriting. > > That sounds great, but I can't think of a way to do it without getting > in the way of the whole docname thing. If someone can think of a > decent way to do that, I agree that we should go with it.
Well, we can begin the section after the // with a character that's reserved according to the URI RFC. If a docname wants to use that character it would have to be %-encoded in the URI. Also, I can't see why anyone would ever need to deviate from using the value of the epoch as the baseline. And increment has a reasonable default. So the only thing that needs to come after the // is something indicating that it's a DBR, possibly followed by ,increment or even ,increment,baseline. -- # tavin cole # if code is law, then Freenet is a crowded theater _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl at freenetproject.org http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
