6 ms·
Am I wrong to suppose that L is locator and I is indicator, thus I being a more broadly term and a somewhat nerdy term for Source?
by wjnc 6y ago
Am I wrong to suppose that L is locator and I is indicator, thus I being a more broadly term and a somewhat nerdy term for Source?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- corty 6y agoL is locator, I is identifier. URLs are a subset of URIs. Both start with a schema (something:...), but URIs lack the information about the location and way to get at a resource. The canonical example for identifier-but-not-location is an ISBN or DOI. That interpretation however requires a very peculiar interpretation of "location", because imho "where can I read about that" can precisely be answered by "ISBN ...". The usual copout "but you don't know where the next library will be" also makes all the traditional URLs non-locations, because you then also don't always know where the next browser is or how to operate it. The rest of the responsible RFC is also not very useful: https://danielmiessler.com/study/difference-between-uri-url/ https://danielmiessler.com/study/difference-between-uri-url/
- sukilot 6y agoURIs can lack the information. Not necessarily.
- 0xffff2 6y agoBeing too lazy to go ready RFCs on a Monday morning, is what a valid schema consists of spelled out? Is `isbn://0441569595` a valid URI? If so, is there a standardized list of schemas?
- corty 6y agoRead the article, someone already read the RFC for you. To your questions: Yes. Almost, urn:isbn:123-4567-89 (URNs are something I neglected to mention to keep things simple). Yes, the IANA maintains a registry.
- sukilot 6y agoI is Identifier. It's broader in the sense that every URL is a URI, but the converse is not true. URI somewhat nerdier because it's lesser known.
- throw7 6y agouri encompasses/superset of both url and urn (there was also urc that went no where). urls have a "scheme" (http/ftp/gopher/etc) to access the resource, while urn is a persistent non-location based type of name identifier e.g. urn:ietf:rfc:2648