From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!border1.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!ecngs!feeder2.ecngs.de!81.171.118.63.MISMATCH!peer03.fr7!futter-mich.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx31.am4.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Felix Krause <contact@flyx.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Message-ID: <2017072023125178180-contact@flyx.org>
References: <2017071720305687401-contact@flyx.org>
 <okj8fj$8ue$1@gioia.aioe.org> <2017071918093536089-contact@flyx.org>
 <oko1kk$1pf7$1@gioia.aioe.org> <2017071923134489971-contact@flyx.org>
 <okprak$fmq$1@gioia.aioe.org> <2017072015354641511-contact@flyx.org>
 <lyh8y6n96n.fsf@pushface.org> <okr5ft$vpp$1@gioia.aioe.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: HTTP with Simple Components: Status.Kind always File
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
X-Complaints-To: abuse@eweka.nl
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 21:11:26 UTC
Organization: Eweka Internet Services
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 23:12:51 +0200
X-Received-Bytes: 2041
X-Received-Body-CRC: 2781793462
X-Original-Bytes: 1990
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:47479
Date: 2017-07-20T23:12:51+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 2017-07-20 20:57:35 +0000, Dmitry A. Kazakov said:

> On 2017-07-20 22:29, Simon Wright wrote:
>> 
>> The RFC that Dmitri quotes is for URIs. You want the one that defines
>> the HTTP protocol, currently RFC7230 - see section 3, Message Format.
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7230#section-3

Ah, I looked at an older RFC for HTTP 1.1; I wasn't aware there was a newer
one. This newer one indeed defines query as part of the request target:

    https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7230#section-5.3

    request-target = origin-form
                    / absolute-form
                    / authority-form
                    / asterisk-form
    origin-form    = absolute-path [ "?" query ]
> 
> So, is it OK to always recognize query part in the path. Correct?

Yes, although to avoid confusion, it may be a good idea to not name it „Path“.
Reading the spec, „Origin“ might be more appropriate. But I guess that change
would break backwards compatibility.

> 
> What is the scheme by default? http? None?

There is no scheme in the origin-form. I would keep this separated from the
full URI and just supply Path and Query in the record.