4 ms·
At least we've mostly gotten away from "h-t-t-p-colon-slash-slash..."
by karlshea 10y ago
At least we've mostly gotten away from "h-t-t-p-colon-slash-slash..."
- bbcbasic 10y agoI heard https mentioned in a spoken url on the radio recently. And they said "that's with secure encryption"
- tomatsu 10y agoI always thought it was odd when they go with the whole "http://www." http://www." voodoo ritual, but then they skip the final slash after the domain.
- derefr 10y agoAFAIK the lack of a path part is allowed in an HTTP URL per RFC2616. http_URL = "http:" "//" host [ ":" port ] [ abs_path [ "?" query ]] > If the abs_path is not present in the URL, it MUST be given as "/" when used as a Request-URI for a resource (section 5.1.2). Browsers may differ on whether they auto-fix schemaless URIs, but they're all required to fix path-less URIs. So it's much "safer" to use them.
- edmccard 10y agoOr even worse, "h-t-t-p-colon-backslash-backslash..." from people who were used to saying "c-colon-backslash"
- netule 10y agoOr worse yet still "forward slash forward slash."
- michaelmior 10y agoHow is forward slash worse? At least that's the correct direction.
- netule 10y agoBecause it's a made up term. It's just called "slash."
- jclulow 10y agoMore like: solidus and reverse solidus!
- michaelmior 10y agoAt least it unambiguously refers to the correct character / as opposed the incorrect character \
- z3t4 10y agoits awesome that URL's can have different protocols. althoug most user/apps will asume http#/www
- DrScump 10y agoOr worse yet, "h-t-t-p colon reverse-backslash reverse-backslash..."