[spec] nitpicking

1. Omar Polo (op (a) omarpolo.com)

Hello,

I was re-reading the spec to clarify I doubt I had about relative vs
absolute URLs and where they're allowed, while I stumbled on this part:

> 2 Gemini Request
> [...]
> <URL> is a UTF-8 encoded absolute URL, including a scheme, of maximum length
> 1024 bytes.
>
> Sending an absolute URL instead of only a path or selector is effectively
> equivalent to building in a HTTP "Host" header. [...]

If I'm understanding correctly, the "instead of only a path or selector"
is redundant, since relative URLs aren't allowed.  This is probably a
leftover from when the spec allowed both relative and absolute URLs in
the request, or I'm missing something?

Thanks,

Omar Polo

Link to individual message.

2. John Cowan (cowan (a) ccil.org)

On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 11:36 AM Omar Polo <op at omarpolo.com> wrote:


> If I'm understanding correctly, the "instead of only a path or selector"
> is redundant, since relative URLs aren't allowed.


I think it is meant to emphasize that this is how Gemini does virtual
hosting (and also proxying), rather than a combination of a relative
reference in the GET line and a Host: header, as HTTP/1.1 does.  So this
sentence is informative rather than normative.



John Cowan          http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan        cowan at ccil.org
                Charles li reis, nostre emperesdre magnes,
                Set anz totz pleinz ad ested in Espagnes.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.orbitalfox.eu/archives/gemini/attachments/20210120/6dd8
625e/attachment.htm>

Link to individual message.

3. Omar Polo (op (a) omarpolo.com)


John Cowan <cowan at ccil.org> writes:

> On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 11:36 AM Omar Polo <op at omarpolo.com> wrote:
>
>
>> If I'm understanding correctly, the "instead of only a path or selector"
>> is redundant, since relative URLs aren't allowed.
>
>
> I think it is meant to emphasize that this is how Gemini does virtual
> hosting (and also proxying), rather than a combination of a relative
> reference in the GET line and a Host: header, as HTTP/1.1 does.  So this
> sentence is informative rather than normative.

Your interpretation seems right.  I initially read it from the
prospective of someone who knew relative URLs were allowed, not as
someone approaching a new protocol.

Thanks,

Omar Polo

>
>
> John Cowan          http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan        cowan at ccil.org
>                 Charles li reis, nostre emperesdre magnes,
>                 Set anz totz pleinz ad ested in Espagnes.

Link to individual message.

---

Previous Thread: [users] Simple Gemini server for testing in the current directory?

Next Thread: Gemini works great for mobile content