3 ms·
I always suspected there must have been 2 archaic null tokens between the :// of http://.. http://... If it was a design choice to use a 3-character separator
by RockyMcNuts 10y ago
I always suspected there must have been 2 archaic null tokens between the :// of http://.. http://...
If it was a design choice to use a 3-character separator instead of a single character, seems an odd choice.
- DougBTX 10y agohttps://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1738.txt https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1738.txt may shed some light on this. It describes the ":" as the separator, while the // is a scheme-specific prefix, like a super-powered path separator. More here: https://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/FAQ.html#etc https://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/FAQ.html#etc
- pbhjpbhj 10y agoWell, it does allow references to //example.com to cover both http and https schemes.
- zackbloom 10y agoIt's discussed a bit in the first portion of this series: https://eager.io/blog/the-history-of-the-url-domain-and-protocol/#the-bit-in-between https://eager.io/blog/the-history-of-the-url-domain-and-prot...