Re: VIS_HTTPSTYLE

[Robert Elz <kre%munnari.OZ.AU@localhost>]

    Date:        Tue, 24 Nov 2009 16:30:34 +0200
    From:        Alan Barrett <apb%cequrux.com@localhost>
    Message-ID:  <20091124143034.GA1955%apb-laptoy.apb.alt.za@localhost>

  | > ORIG: http://www.netbsd.org/
  | > HTTP: http%3a%2f%2fwww.netbsd.org%2f
  | > 
  | I think the above examples are correct.

Aside from the stuff after the ? which has already been discussed,
(stuff after ';' follows same rules as stuff after '?' I believe)
this still makes no sense to me.

I just tried using the output form in my browser, and just as I
expected, if I use http%3a instead of http: the browser doesn't
recognise it as a HTTP url, it just prepends http:// to whatever I
typed, then (of course) complains that the name doesn't exist.

Why would anyone ever even contemplate escaping the ':' that
ends the protocol field of a URL?   That's insane...

Note, it isn't the quoting function that I think is incorrect here,
it is its usage, it should never be asked to quote the "http:" part
of the URL - it is from that we know that it is an HTTP URL, and
only from knowing that do we know that HTTP URL quoting is appropriate,
if it was a
        xyzzy:something-or-other
using HTTP quoting on "something-or-other" would potentially lead to
wildly incorrect results.   That is, first you figure out what needs
quoting, and what quoting style, then you apply the appropriate quoting
function to the data that needs it, and only that data.

kre