From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 18:59:55 -0400
From: Kris Maglione <bsdaemon@comcast.net>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] URI scheme for 9P2000 resources
Message-ID: <20070630225955.GW28917@kris.home>
References: <5d375e920706301326j6efe8921td46d6958299eef62@mail.gmail.com>
	<b0002e1a646d4feec9f86f8225cd9bdb@9netics.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="2+K7TauFN1Oc3ugB"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <b0002e1a646d4feec9f86f8225cd9bdb@9netics.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15 (2007-04-06)
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 8d78ff88-ead2-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025


--2+K7TauFN1Oc3ugB
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, Jun 30, 2007 at 03:54:49PM -0700, Skip Tavakkolian wrote:
>please don't use '9p:' for the uri scheme.  there will likely be more
>than one 9p handler plugin for any browser.  make it specific to your
>application (e.g.  'u9fs:')

I think that this is silly. 9p is a protocol that presends a=20
filesystem, just like ftp, file://, smb://. Would it make sense=20
to use wsftp://, gnomefs://, samba://? The URI scheme should=20
signify the interface, not the implementation.

--=20
Kris Maglione

When your opponent is down, kick him.

--2+K7TauFN1Oc3ugB
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.3 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFGhuBrseQZD8Aui4wRAh76AKCcIXhzqRgaR5vLBePTvb5wb0XnlQCfde3M
iCGKH/52RX6hmml9s0Bcnj0=
=MCRM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--2+K7TauFN1Oc3ugB--