>>PPS. On strict orders from Dan Connolly, I'm emitting one standard metric
>>cluon of Establishmentarian Disapproval (TM) for the use of <URL:*>.
Dan butts in:
>MS Outlook isn't smart enough to recognize URLs that begin URL:http://
>so Keith's usage annoys me, whether it's correct or not.
>You hit the nail on the head. Connolly says that UR*'s are all the same;
>I agree: a name is a location with a social contract behind it.
OK, fellows, cluon received. For the purposes of this list. But I've been
down this rabbit hole more times than strictly necessary with the TBTF read-
ership; in the newsletter RFC-1738 is my story and I'm stickin' to it. See
the notes to <http://www.tbtf.com/archive/03-01-97.html>.
>being ugly and clogging UR* parsers, it encourages a false dichotomy.