Drew DeVault wrote: > On Mon Mar 15, 2021 at 6:01 PM EDT, brian m. carlson wrote: >> So I don't think this is a thing we can do, simply because in general >> URLs aren't suitable for sharing this kind of information. > > That's simply not true. They are quite capable at this task, and are > fulfilling this duty for a wide varitety of applications today. > > I don't really understand the disconnect here. No, URLs are not magic, > but they are perfectly sufficient for this use-case. I'm not sure it's a disconnect; instead, it just looks like we disagree. That said, with more details about the use case it might be possible to sway me in another direction. To maintain the URI analogy: the URI does not tell me the content-type of what I can access from there. Until I know that content-type, I may not know what the best tool is to access it. The root of the disagreement, though, is "Git URLs" looking like a URI in the first place. They're not meant to be universal at all. They are specifically for Git. Thanks, Jonathan
