file:///

[Allan Sandfeld Jensen]

On Thursday 11 November 2004 22:02, Andras Mantia wrote:
> On Thursday 11 November 2004 22:50, Richard Smith wrote:
> > On Thursday 11 November 2004 20:14, Andras Mantia wrote:
> > > If this the new desired behavior, what is the exact reasoning
> > > behind it, taking in account that file:/somedir was enough until
> > > now? A link to some bug report or other document is enough.
> >
> > Here you go:
> >
> > http://freedesktop.org/Standards/file-uri-spec
>
> [...]
>
> > See also the thread starting here:
> >
> > http://freedesktop.org/pipermail/xdg/2004-November/005327.html
>
> Thanks for the links. After reading the thread I didn't see a real
> consensus and I agree that displaying file:/// instead of file: is just
> visual noise for the average user and something that he cannot
> understand especially because KDE used to display only file:/ and
> accepted (and still accepts) that form. Well, I don't want to repeat
> the discussion here if it is avoidable. ;-) Just MHO.
>
I completly agree.

We can just specify the syntax as "file:[//host]/path" making the remote host 
syntax optional (what would the protocol be anyway???). Quite francly I do 
not give a fuck about what is a standard or not, as long as we _also_ support 
standard-complient syntax.

The KDE syntax for protocols have always been "protocol:path", I do not see 
_any_ reason to change that to something as anal as "protocol://path", 
especially if we only change it for the file protocol and not generally.

(Actually I subscribe to XDG, but skipped the discussion on file:/ because I 
thought the issue was too pedantic to discuss. Apparently most sane people 
did.).

`Allan