by geckzilla » Tue Aug 20, 2013 5:49 am
sasha wrote:geckzilla wrote:I asked a few people and finally have discovered that leaving the protocol off allows the browser to decide which to use. However, since APOD is always served unsecured, it would definitely not hurt to add the http: on the front. It's up to you whether or not you care enough to have sasha's apparently poorly written Android app function.
Here's a short article detailing a protocol-relative URL:
http://www.paulirish.com/2010/the-proto ... ative-url/
Thanks for the vote of confidence. Rest assured, my app functions according to the RFC 3986. For your reference, here is a relevant part:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#section-1.1.1:
Each URI begins with a scheme name, as defined in Section 3.1, that refers to a specification for assigning identifiers within that scheme.
My app is not a web browser.
Regards,
.a
Oh? Emphasis mine. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding it, but the very document you link to indicates that the use of relative referencing is permitted.
It is often the case that a group or "tree" of documents has been
constructed to serve a common purpose, wherein the vast majority of
URI references in these documents point to resources within the tree
rather than outside it. Similarly, documents located at a particular
site are much more likely to refer to other resources at that site
than to resources at remote sites. Relative referencing of URIs
allows document trees to be partially independent of their location
and access scheme. For instance, it is possible for a single set of
hypertext documents to be simultaneously accessible and traversable
via each of the "file", "http", and "ftp" schemes if the documents
refer to each other with relative references. Furthermore, such
document trees can be moved, as a whole, without changing any of the
relative references.
Just defining "authority component" here. I think it's referring to the http:, https:, ftp:, file:, etc. This is a bit more than I ever cared to know about URI syntax.
The authority component is preceded by a double slash ("//") and is
terminated by the next slash ("/"), question mark ("?"), or number
sign ("#") character, or by the end of the URI.
Finally,
If a URI contains an authority component, then the path component
must either be empty or begin with a slash ("/") character. If a URI
does not contain an authority component, then the path cannot begin
with two slash characters ("//"). In addition, a URI reference
(Section 4.1) may be a relative-path reference, in which case the
first path segment cannot contain a colon (":") character.
[quote="sasha"][quote="geckzilla"]I asked a few people and finally have discovered that leaving the protocol off allows the browser to decide which to use. However, since APOD is always served unsecured, it would definitely not hurt to add the http: on the front. It's up to you whether or not you care enough to have sasha's apparently poorly written Android app function.
Here's a short article detailing a protocol-relative URL: http://www.paulirish.com/2010/the-protocol-relative-url/[/quote]
Thanks for the vote of confidence. Rest assured, my app functions according to the RFC 3986. For your reference, here is a relevant part:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#section-1.1.1:
[i]Each URI begins with a scheme name, as defined in Section 3.1, that refers to a specification for assigning identifiers within that scheme. [/i]
My app is not a web browser.
Regards,
.a[/quote]
Oh? Emphasis mine. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding it, but the very document you link to indicates that the use of relative referencing is permitted.
[quote]It is often the case that a group or "tree" of documents has been
constructed to serve a common purpose, wherein the vast majority of
URI references in these documents point to resources within the tree
rather than outside it. Similarly, documents located at a particular
site are much more likely to refer to other resources at that site
than to resources at remote sites. Relative referencing of URIs
allows document trees to be partially independent of their location
and access scheme. [b]For instance, it is possible for a single set of
hypertext documents to be simultaneously accessible and traversable
via each of the "file", "http", and "ftp" schemes if the documents
refer to each other with relative references.[/b] Furthermore, such
document trees can be moved, as a whole, without changing any of the
relative references.[/quote]
Just defining "authority component" here. I think it's referring to the http:, https:, ftp:, file:, etc. This is a bit more than I ever cared to know about URI syntax.
[quote]The authority component is preceded by a double slash ("//") and is
terminated by the next slash ("/"), question mark ("?"), or number
sign ("#") character, or by the end of the URI.[/quote]
Finally,
[quote]If a URI contains an authority component, then the path component
must either be empty or begin with a slash ("/") character. If a URI
does not contain an authority component, then the path cannot begin
with two slash characters ("//"). In addition, a URI reference
(Section 4.1) may be a relative-path reference, in which case the
first path segment cannot contain a colon (":") character.[/quote]