* John Cowan wrote:
>> >To clarify, the term "URI" includes only absolute URLs and URNs, and
>> >excludes relative URLs as well as fragment identifiers.
>>
>> Section 2 of RFC 1866 clearly distinguishes "absolute URI" ("a URI in
>> absolute form") and "URI" and explicitly states "URIs in common practice
>> include Uniform Resource Locators (URLs) and Relative URLs". Could you
>> please cite an RFC that clearly invalidates RFC 1866 in this regard?
>
>RFC 1866 (HTML 2.0) defers to RFCs 1630, 1738, and 1808. All of these
>have been superseded by RFC 2396, with the exception of the syntax of
>certain URL schemes which are still defined by RFC 1738.
And where does RFC 2396 explicitly state what you suggest? And since it
would contradict RFC 1866, how do I know RFC 2396 is right and RFC 1866
is wrong and not the other way round?
