Christopher R. Hertel crh at
Fri Dec 29 16:43:24 GMT 2000

It has been pointed out that this is a one-character change to any parser 
code.  One could make a case for using either (I suppose).

Perhaps it is time to consider the process of 'registering' the smb:// 
syntax and working it through whatever standards body is out there to 
consider it.  I'm sure we would get an opinion from such a group.

Chris -)-----

> Steve Langasek wrote:
> > Michael Sweet wrote:
> > >
> > > The backslash character is almost universally used as an escape
> > > character; that plus the fact that the RFC for URIs specifically
> > > excludes it in URIs makes it an unsuitable choice.
> >
> > Yes, the RFC specifically excludes its use.  But RFCs are intended to be
> > guides, not laws, and occasionally the RFCs need to be revised.  I think
> > this may be an RFC that could use a footnote.
> This is a legitmate criticism.  The RFC does not have to be followed.
> I have to question the motive here, though.  If the only dispute were
> whether to use ";" or "\", and ";" is RFC-compliant, and "\" is not,
> why should we use the latter and possibly amend the RFC?  Because NT
> users are more familiar with it?  That seems a very poor reason for
> such drastic action.
> 	- Kevin Colby
> 	  kevinc at

Christopher R. Hertel -)-----                   University of Minnesota
crh at              Networking and Telecommunications Services

    Ideals are like stars; you will not succeed in touching them
    with your choose them as your guides, and following
    them you will reach your destiny.  --Carl Schultz

More information about the samba-technical mailing list