NYCPHP Meetup

[John Zabroski]

Someone already posted RFC 2396.  Yet, RFC 2396 is NOT
the only RFC that defines URIs!  In fact, it is an
*OLD* RFC!  Please refer to RFC 3986, as it is the RFC
currently referenced Uniform Resource Iidentifier:
Generic Syntax by the Namespaces in XML 1.0 Standard.

http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml-names/

If you want your work to be upward-compatible with XML
technologies like XForms, then read the Namespaces in
XML 1.0 Standard and RFC 3986.  This is important,
because in 2000, there was a W3C plenary ballot that
voted in favor of removing Standard support for
relative URIs.  See Section 4.4 of RFC 3986 for the
current information.

Here is the relevant information copied and pasted, in
case you are unfamiliar with reading RFCs and are not
sure what to look for:

   When a same-document reference is dereferenced for
a retrieval
   action, the target of that reference is defined to
be within the same
   entity (representation, document, or message) as
the reference;
   therefore, a dereference should not result in a new
retrieval action.

Moral of the story: Always be up to date on Standards,
check the date of the Standard you are using, and make
sure it is the most recent Standard!

--- Cliff Hirsch <cliff at pinestream.com> wrote:

> I like to use <form action =²² as a handy (ok, lazy)
> way to submit to ³self²
> and capture the current URI, including query string.
> It¹s nice to have this
> info for later processing for idempotent stuff,
> redirects, etc.
> 
> But, my question ‹ can I count on it?
>
> <snip/>
>
> So can I count of this behavior?
> 
> Cliff


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Get easy, one-click access to your favorites. 
Make Yahoo! your homepage.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs