Re: [GNUnet-developers] End-user wishlist

[anonymous1]

On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 06:13:55PM -0500, Christian Grothoff wrote:
> 
> Ok, I looked at the RFC. I would not *like* to have the "&" in the URIs since 
> a) they would have to be masked on the command line, and

For the record, this probably isn't much of an issue, since all shells that 
I've bothered to learn allow character escaping. Those that don't know how to 
use shells will probably use a GUI way of doing things anyway.

> b) we may want to have other query parameters in the future

Yes, and I stand corrected: your suggestion below is the best I've seen yet, 
but the query format would still be useful for conducting searches via AFS as 
in this example:

gnunet://afs/search?keyword=lesbian&keyword=pr0n&mimetype=image-jpeg

(Just an idea)

> I agree with that "afs" should be part of the URI. I would think of "afs" as 
> the authority that is responsible for the data. For the non-hierarchical hash 
> codes, I would suggest to use "." as a separator. That would yield:
> 
> gnunet://afs/HASH1.HASH2.CRC.SIZE
> 
> We could use optional additions like "?ANONYMITY-RECEIVE=42" to specify
> options.
> 
> For namespaces, we would have:
> 
> gnunet://afs/NAMESPACE/HASH1.HASH2.CRC.SIZE
> 
> Any further comments?

This proposal looks better thought-out than any I've seen so far. Again, what's 
important is concensus and consistency between implementations. I hope this 
would be sufficient to take care of everyone's concerns.