On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 07:45:36PM -0400, Peter Todd wrote: > On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 06:29:20PM -0500, Brandon wrote: > > I mean, really, you're talking about putting a typed functional language > > in our URIs. > > > > Here's an idea. If you want an expandable way to specify parameters: > > > > freenet:SSK at 2932032/blah?baseline=203102&interval=202020 > > > > Sure it's not nearly as pretty, but we could *at least* use the standard > > syntax for specifying parameters. > > But by doing that you're implying that those parameters are client > changable and not really part of the key, just a option. They > aren't. Change 'em and things break.
One more thing, ? and & are special characters in the UNIX shell. No good. And it makes things a lot more awkward if we want to allow fproxy to have paramaters such as request htl. -- GCS d s+:-- a--- C++++ UL++++ P L+++ E W++ N- o K- w-- O- M V- PS+ PE+ Y+ PGP+++ t 5 X R+ tv-- b+ DI+ D++ G e- h! r-- y-- pete at petertodd.ca http://retep.tripod.com -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20010405/81493d5d/attachment.pgp>
