From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD155C433F5 for ; Tue, 29 Mar 2022 16:23:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S239126AbiC2QZf (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Mar 2022 12:25:35 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:49694 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S238850AbiC2QZc (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Mar 2022 12:25:32 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-x431.google.com (mail-wr1-x431.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::431]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 26F291F1619 for ; Tue, 29 Mar 2022 09:23:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wr1-x431.google.com with SMTP id h4so25574053wrc.13 for ; Tue, 29 Mar 2022 09:23:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject:content-language:to :cc:references:from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Qc9f8f8J4R4HGXXCWak5Mic4E3ZPMVPxY5GxBWY//xg=; b=YgBMISP0ad6xYhDLmcKpl/qqe111+VvDsSl1eWafQB1CkhSA1Rvg5uf8Q4JUZTIpbQ Ws5fh2coqaHxn9KvVlwTpv7j7IVLDV0RFdqc1g5SEAjtSb02ZWF5wk/XKAxuXlzf2Sgz kFX0tqnWU02uYnUsiOThvVg942IkGYjpRqW8La5tAeLzek5vROx2ScvQUOjmJvCpMg4K N6dQLutCXQmsk63CgJ4RFFAvUEpAiT18V9w5zqQq+4DYxeGhRbWvtQgmb8Ycqrihy0iF 4513pxd55Xoujy8i084BC3RFZ7mVvH2MAVvqZxurXYBxDtJgRkkc4a0SmolAX0+2lY9n 1FJw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:cc:references:from:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=Qc9f8f8J4R4HGXXCWak5Mic4E3ZPMVPxY5GxBWY//xg=; b=PwlzVISg/vPH0fu88YLaT/Y6tA9QpqQroN/nrsbTZitDW8n/XtMkZungChwZrGrcX/ QsI1hb2XS48Jyo1Ddob7VVlvCkNyUjDpfDz9Vfn8LhJyxwQtNOdGi+jaCvWe5jT60c+r vW6pCS8nd67wBgylGWCo0MbDGJ9f/RBsmB/mWojtemC8C5iOUzy5YqBAtm/6YWflYDil 6Nf+yNs0sQ4wm8jcrfin3lf1jiK4nMMS6qjfJBZLJ1PB7hxnN/Gpe5g1M47LjBJhzxxB ywwSUoUdiqr7PTZhQbcJuT9vyYFyKSKWCokT3sPCV5zeA5SqbZcFVVtpQE8rvqY+bH3e p4eA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533C9gvH2+X1rprWHd4VUGp15R06txYfksSWNmoI6HuV4+SMHFVb zoK1uBMbucdIaSwqV40GI+o= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw3dvm2P28AJ/iYlEnzIPkbCI5OV4ORi5d/n32M0+cKhJSCtQWPUgTZZs0OqU7i7PeVE1IVzw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:186d:b0:204:110a:d832 with SMTP id d13-20020a056000186d00b00204110ad832mr32273753wri.47.1648571025468; Tue, 29 Mar 2022 09:23:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.160] ([170.253.36.171]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v15-20020a056000144f00b002057eac999fsm15692115wrx.76.2022.03.29.09.23.44 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 29 Mar 2022 09:23:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <36b89bec-1def-e87c-5477-c87f2f0e48e9@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2022 18:23:43 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.7.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] uri.7: The term URL is deprecated, in favor of URI Content-Language: en-US To: Jakub Wilk Cc: Michael Kerrisk , linux-man@vger.kernel.org, NGINX Unit References: <20220328182707.6935-1-alx.manpages@gmail.com> <20220328221557.njqx4jtbvrgv44lc@jwilk.net> From: "Alejandro Colomar (man-pages)" In-Reply-To: <20220328221557.njqx4jtbvrgv44lc@jwilk.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-man@vger.kernel.org Hi Jakub! On 3/29/22 00:15, Jakub Wilk wrote: > * Alejandro Colomar , 2022-03-28, 20:27: >> See RFCs 4395 (obsoleted by 7595) and 7595. >> >> So, since URI and URL have been used as synonims > > s/synonim/synonym/ (here and elsewhere) Oops. I always doubt when writing words with two y/i in them. I should run dict -m synonim or echo synonim synonym | spell before typing! :) > >> the RFCs seem to have explicitly avoided URL, and now use URI as the >> only term, which still means what it meant (so now URL is just a >> synonim for URI). > > No, as far as RFCs are concerned, URLs are a proper subset of URIs; they > are not synonyms. Hmmm, now I've read a few more RFCs, and it seems you're right. > >> This commit replaces (almost all) occurences of URL by URI, except >> when it is referring to the old term itself.  Keep some legacy info >> just for readers to understand this. > > I'm not sure this is a step in the right direction. As a data point, in > contrast to IETF, WHATWG standardized on the term "URL": > https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#goals As you say, it's not. I'm now more confused than I was before, so I will revert this change. If you feel like you could update the page, since you seem to know more than me in this regard, that would be great. Thanks for the review! Alex -- Alejandro Colomar Linux man-pages comaintainer; https://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/ http://www.alejandro-colomar.es/