Roy T. Fielding fielding@ebuilt.com
Mon, 18 Jun 2001 14:12:53 -0700

On Mon, Jun 18, 2001 at 12:09:02PM -0700, Bill Mills wrote:
> I had not asked this before, but does this indicate that the algorithms
> currently in use do not conform to the RFC per se?  Admittedly we fall into
> the vague <schem name>:<opaque scheme specific part> type of construction.

Yes, there are still a significant number of applications that do not
conform to RFC 2396.  Older versions of Netscape Navigator are the worst.

In any case, the scheme1:scheme2:* syntax makes it impossible for the
URL to be used with relative URI, and prevents generic URI parsing
code from being used to separate the URI into components for use.
It is therefore a bad design unless it is the designer's intention to make
it harder to implement the URI with relative forms and existing parsers.

The "." was included in the URI scheme syntax specifically for this purpose.
I don't understand why anyone would try to avoid it.