> On Wed, 14 Jun 1995, Chris Marrin wrote:
> > On Jun 14, 11:28am, Brian Behlendorf wrote:
> > > Subject: Re: SPEC: DNS conventions & "naming" of VRML sites
> > >
> > > Actually, it's very easy to return a VRML document to a VRML browser and
> > an
> > > HTML document to an HTML browser for the *same* URL (i.e.,
> > > http://www.vrml.org/), given that browser authors are doing the right
> > thing
> > > with Accept: headers. (HINT HINT) I also think "WWW" includes VRML and
> > all
> > > other media types, so I don't agree that we need a s"parate convention
> > for
> > > naming HTTP hosts that hold VRML page
.
> >
> > Not being guilt ridden I won't assume that HINT referred to any browser in
> > particular :-)...
>
> I haven't tested any of the VRML-particular browsers on this, I would
> presume you were more aware of this than anyone. I was mostly referring
> to the other regular web browsers. Emacs-W3 and Arena are the only ones
> that come close.
I think you guys are missing the point. I may be misinterpreting the
original suggestion, but I did not get that impression that it was
intended as a requirement, or that any browser should use the site name to
decide how to display the received files. The point of the suggestion, as
I understood it, was to help general users identify, by host name, which
was the best server to be trying to get files from. For example, if I were
to get a hint from someone that Netscape Inc. has a cool new VRML space,
then my gui> at where to find it would be "vrml.netscape.com", just as my
gui> es would be tend to be correct for FTP and WWW from the same site.
It's just a way of advertising what is available, and guiding the users
to the right server.
--- Andrew C. Esh mailto:[email protected]
Computer Network Technology [email protected] (finger for PGP key)
6500 Wedgwood Road 612.550.8000 (main)
Maple Grove MN 55311 612.550.8229 (direct)
<A HREF="http://www.mtn.org/~andrewes">ACE Home Page</A>