📅 Original date posted:2012-07-16
📝 Original message:I'm sure that there are many but my Google Search-Fu is not strong enough
to build a query to identify how widespread they are.
Maybe once we have sufficient evidence to support the suspicion we should
post to the main developer forum asking for a cleanup. After all, a Bitcoin
URI starting bitcoin://<address> doesn't actually make much sense because
there is no hierarchy in Bitcoin - it's flat with only an address being a
mandatory element.
I don't want to be all anal about this, but looking at RFC 3986 #10 (
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#page-10) it's pretty clear that
introducing a false hierarchy is breaking the specification since it
presumes the existence of a relative URI.
On 16 July 2012 10:02, Wladimir <laanwj at gmail.com> wrote:
> But is he the only one using the broken URLs? It was my impression that
> they were widespread already.
>
> Wladimir
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 10:52 AM, Gary Rowe <g.rowe at froot.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Is it worth having a few more people email Ben to ask him politely to
>> fall into line with the BIP? No point encouraging broken windows by not
>> speaking out.
>>
>>
>> On 16 July 2012 09:16, Andreas Schildbach <andreas at schildbach.de> wrote:
>>
>>> > I asked Ben to fix this (social networks don't parse QRcodes after
>>> > all), but after explaining that social networks don't parse URLs
>>> > without :// in them, he stopped responding to my emails. So I've gone
>>> > ahead and added support for reading these types of URLs to bitcoinj,
>>> > in the interests of "just works" interoperability.
>>> >
>>> > This mail is just a heads up in case anyone else wants to do the same
>>> > thing. Hopefully at some point, Ben will stop generating such QRcodes
>>> > and we can remove these hacks and get back to BIP compliance.
>>>
>>> The problem with this "accept everything even if broken" approach is
>>> that people will probably never fix the broken stuff. So we likely end
>>> up with a fragmented de-facto standard.
>>>
>>> That does not mean I am totally against accepting broken URLs, but there
>>> should be at least a promise that they will be fixed at the source.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Live Security Virtual Conference
>>> Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
>>> threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
>>> will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
>>> threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Live Security Virtual Conference
>> Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
>> threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
>> will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
>> threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20120716/2096e804/attachment.html>;
Gary Rowe [ARCHIVE] /
npub1j8…wpach
2023-06-07 10:22:50
in reply to nevent1q…als6
Author Public Key
npub1j8mfekhmgtne6ptzxptudrcpwd6wtyxk64qdn3swy2nv46zuledskwpachPublished at
2023-06-07 10:22:50Event JSON
{
"id": "411c8ab96c713cffcd93cbcfc26e405bdc7b2d021dc1a4bec594a38801fdf095",
"pubkey": "91f69cdafb42e79d05623057c68f017374e590d6d540d9c60e22a6cae85cfe5b",
"created_at": 1686133370,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"7f428d2f81129d741c0098024ba028c7ffc2f49c8c76c226838a78285a40c2a9",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"f68bd22045b6383652da97e4a984d299134a0466b8264b7ca647939055b681ca",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"30217b018a47b99ed4c20399b44b02f70ec4f58ed77a2814a563fa28322ef722"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2012-07-16\n📝 Original message:I'm sure that there are many but my Google Search-Fu is not strong enough\nto build a query to identify how widespread they are.\n\nMaybe once we have sufficient evidence to support the suspicion we should\npost to the main developer forum asking for a cleanup. After all, a Bitcoin\nURI starting bitcoin://\u003caddress\u003e doesn't actually make much sense because\nthere is no hierarchy in Bitcoin - it's flat with only an address being a\nmandatory element.\n\nI don't want to be all anal about this, but looking at RFC 3986 #10 (\nhttp://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#page-10) it's pretty clear that\nintroducing a false hierarchy is breaking the specification since it\npresumes the existence of a relative URI.\n\nOn 16 July 2012 10:02, Wladimir \u003claanwj at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e But is he the only one using the broken URLs? It was my impression that\n\u003e they were widespread already.\n\u003e\n\u003e Wladimir\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 10:52 AM, Gary Rowe \u003cg.rowe at froot.co.uk\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\n\u003e\u003e Is it worth having a few more people email Ben to ask him politely to\n\u003e\u003e fall into line with the BIP? No point encouraging broken windows by not\n\u003e\u003e speaking out.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e On 16 July 2012 09:16, Andreas Schildbach \u003candreas at schildbach.de\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e \u003e I asked Ben to fix this (social networks don't parse QRcodes after\n\u003e\u003e\u003e \u003e all), but after explaining that social networks don't parse URLs\n\u003e\u003e\u003e \u003e without :// in them, he stopped responding to my emails. So I've gone\n\u003e\u003e\u003e \u003e ahead and added support for reading these types of URLs to bitcoinj,\n\u003e\u003e\u003e \u003e in the interests of \"just works\" interoperability.\n\u003e\u003e\u003e \u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e \u003e This mail is just a heads up in case anyone else wants to do the same\n\u003e\u003e\u003e \u003e thing. Hopefully at some point, Ben will stop generating such QRcodes\n\u003e\u003e\u003e \u003e and we can remove these hacks and get back to BIP compliance.\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e The problem with this \"accept everything even if broken\" approach is\n\u003e\u003e\u003e that people will probably never fix the broken stuff. So we likely end\n\u003e\u003e\u003e up with a fragmented de-facto standard.\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e That does not mean I am totally against accepting broken URLs, but there\n\u003e\u003e\u003e should be at least a promise that they will be fixed at the source.\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e ------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\u003e\u003e\u003e Live Security Virtual Conference\n\u003e\u003e\u003e Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and\n\u003e\u003e\u003e threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions\n\u003e\u003e\u003e will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware\n\u003e\u003e\u003e threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/\n\u003e\u003e\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e\u003e\u003e Bitcoin-development mailing list\n\u003e\u003e\u003e Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net\n\u003e\u003e\u003e https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e ------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\u003e\u003e Live Security Virtual Conference\n\u003e\u003e Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and\n\u003e\u003e threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions\n\u003e\u003e will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware\n\u003e\u003e threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/\n\u003e\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e\u003e Bitcoin-development mailing list\n\u003e\u003e Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net\n\u003e\u003e https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20120716/2096e804/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "6e82c4b31261beb222def11cc0cce63df28554d379c125a4a78ead5034810acce5ce54c441651573fcec8b1d931ffb1314119c45cb8549dcd56e115e76629afd"
}