13 Jun
2010
13 Jun
'10
4:10 a.m.
On Sun, 13 Jun 2010, fons(a)kokkinizita.net wrote:
OK, let me rephrase the question: why are such ambiguous
or misleading 'symbols' being used ?
It's up to the authors of those components. I agree, using
http:// should be discouraged unless it's a persisent URL.
I think the LV2 devs encourge these URI's to /be/ persistent
URL's... so they haven't opted to define a URI scheme (e.g.
lv2://). But I think having an LV2 URI scheme would be a
Good Thing.
Unfortunately, in XML namespaces (also URI's) this happens
often, too.
-gabriel
What is the purpose of 'http://' in that case
?
They're just symbols.