"Stephen J. Turnbull" <turnbull(a)sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> writes:
>>>>> "Kai" == Kai Grossjohann
Kai> Why do we have to use URL syntax if it is inconvenient?
Kai> Wouldn't "/ftp:user＠host:/path/to/file" work, too?
Specifically, it doesn't generalize very well to relative URLs with
non-default port numbers.
There is no such thing as a relative URL with a non-default port
number. Please note that all URLs starting with "http:" are absolute
even though Netscape accepts strange ones like "http:file" meaning the
same thing as "file". (The RFCs I read a year or so ago required
"http:" to be followed by "//".)
But I agree that port numbers should be allowed.
Btw, I'd say that one uses "/nihp:user＠host:/path/to/file" for the Not
Invented Here Protocol.
Abort this operation? [Abort] [Cancel]