11–20 of 35 posts
I quite like the semi-colons. I wonder how we ended up with the slightly unwieldy ?foo=bar&some=thing
Is there any reason we couldn't just use that anyway?
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#section-3.3
For
example, the semicolon (";") and equals ("=") reserved characters are
often used to delimit parameters and parameter values applicable to
that segment. The comma (",") reserved character is often used for
similar purposes. For example, one URI producer might use a segment
such as "name;v=1.1" to indicate a reference to version 1.1 of
"name", whereas another might use a segment such as "name,1.1" to
indicate the same
Which, by the way, this matrix relative URL proposal seems to ignore - how is ./subpage resolved relative to /map;x=250;y=582 ?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Think “how do I implement a search engine whose interface is visible in the browser address bar?” This was a reasonable question on the early web. And that’s why they are called query params. The question mark indicates you’re making a query. And the ampersand is a boolean operator. You could imagine query params implementing | in addition to &.
I think to non-techies the semi-colons are still more intuitive - I often see non-technical people mess up the ? and &, either by using just one of them or by getting them the wrong way around.
It did, in at least one way: https://docs.spring.io/spring-framework/reference/web/webmvc...
If we include this with Matrix URIs, we could have a scheme format that could work with remote data/objects in a convenient and logical way. RESTful APIs do not seem to be quite the same though. Like some universal API ... not sure how it would look.
If my query would be "weather?" then any API should understand this to mean I'd like to return the local weather. But as an API. Naturally we have AI now so any such queries become trivial at all times, but this is still not quite what was meant. We kind of limited things here because "all external input may be malicious". This then meant no further development in this area, because "too dangerous". Every time I try to use JavaScript to read a local file, I am reminded of that as limitation. They did not think that there are valid, non-malicious use cases, so I am using ruby and python rather than JavaScript (I could use node, but it kind of feels ... so dirty when using it).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there any reason we couldn't just use that anyway?
If you're relying on HTML forms being filled in to generate queries, the browser will always generate standard query parameters with a question mark and ampersands. But if you're making your own links, you can generate them however you like. Semi-colons should work fine, though you may need to write your one URL parsing functions.
I also recall actually seeing some web pages somewhere using semicolon, possibly IBM stuff.
I quite like the semi-colons. I wonder how we ended up with the slightly unwieldy ?foo=bar&some=thing
Seems Like the recommendation changed from supporting ; and & to only using &. Thinking about it, it is a little surprising as, if I remember correctly, in HTML source you should encode & as & right?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seems Like the recommendation changed from supporting ; and & to only using &. Thinking about it, it is a little surprising as, if I remember correctly, in HTML source you should encode & as & right?
& as an escape character only applies to text nodes. Of course, if you want to display the URL on a page, you have to escape it, but not in the href.
I quite like the semi-colons. I wonder how we ended up with the slightly unwieldy ?foo=bar&some=thing
Is there any reason we couldn't just use that anyway?