Greetings, May I suggest you take a look at the specification for the data uri scheme in RFC 2397 (https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2397)? It's solving a problem related to the one you describe, and it might be a useful document to keep in mind as you describe the use cases you want to address and the mechanisms you propose.
I've read your draft and the text below, but the cases in which this approach might be useful are still elusive for me. regards, Ted Hardie On Wed, Aug 7, 2024 at 3:54 PM Soni "It/Its" L. <[email protected]> wrote: > datatracker URI: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-soni-meta-uri/ > > we made a previous post on meta-URIs, it didn't get any responses but > we'd like to discuss additional use-cases. > > you've already heard of the auth URI idea, our proposal to ultimately > kill userdata altogether. that's far from the only use-case however. > > we could have a mercurial URI, which would enable click-to-clone > functionality. mercurial supports ssh and http protocols, so embedding > an entire ssh or http URI (instead of making an entire custom syntax) is > just convenient. the fragment identifier can be used for some things > (e.g. subtrees, we're not sure if mercurial supports subtrees, but the > idea is to filter out the repo so it only shows a specific subdirectory, > instead of the entire repo. this is entirely client-side.) but other > things would be a little out of place in the fragment identifier (things > that require server-side processing, like the clone depth, what branches > to fetch, etc should *probably* go on the meta-URI instead of the > fragment?). this would also have the added benefit of better > interoperability with distro packaging tools, if the meta-URI has the > appropriate extension points for distro use. distros already use URI > schemes to distinguish VCS sources from HTTP sources, but they each seem > to make up their own and don't register them. (this is where you get > things like git+http, hg+http, and let's not get started on what they do > with fragment identifiers...) > > but we might need to update RFC3986. > > -- > plural system (tend to say 'we'), it/she/they, it instead of you > > -- > Witarea mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >
-- Witarea mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
