原典 RFC2396

翻訳 98.9.20開始


Copyleft: 1998, 魔術幻燈

Network Working Group
Request for Comments: 2396
Updates: 1808, 1738
Category: Standards Track

T. Berners-Lee
R. Fielding
U.C. Irvine
L. Masinter
Xerox Corporation
August 1998

Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic Syntax

Status of this Memo

この文書は、インターネット社会のためのインターネット標準過程作法を決めるもので、改良のための議論や教示を求めます。この作法の標準化の状況と現状については、『Internet Official Protocol Standards 』(STD 1)の最新版を参照してください。この書き付けの配布は無制限です。
This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

Copyright Notice

Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1998). All Rights Reserved.


この書面はURIに適用できる操作の上位集合について述べています。これはURIの文法と基本的な機能の二つからなります。正当なURIがどういうものであるか理解するには、文法とそれに付随する記述を学ばなくてはなりません。 ここで述べられた機能性の中には、全ての URI 用語に適用できないものもあります。また、操作によっては、使われた用語とは無関係に、 URI を使って確実に媒体種別が拾えるときにのみ可能なものもあります。
This paper describes a "superset" of operations that can be applied to URI. It consists of both a grammar and a description of basic functionality for URI. To understand what is a valid URI, both the grammar and the associated description have to be studied. Some of the functionality described is not applicable to all URI schemes, and some operations are only possible when certain media types are retrieved using the URI, regardless of the scheme used.

概要 Abstract

定型素材識別子(URI)は、抽象的あるいは物理的な素材を識別するための短い文字列です。この文書では、絶対表現と相対表現の両方について、またその使い分けについて、URIの書き方を定義します。これは、RFC 1738とRFC 1808で定められた書き方を改めるものです。
A Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) is a compact string of characters for identifying an abstract or physical resource. This document defines the generic syntax of URI, including both absolute and relative forms, and guidelines for their use; it revises and replaces the generic definitions in RFC 1738 and RFC 1808.

This document defines a grammar that is a superset of all valid URI, such that an implementation can parse the common components of a URI reference without knowing the scheme-specific requirements of every possible identifier type. This document does not define a generative grammar for URI; that task will be performed by the individual specifications of each URI scheme.

1. はじめに Introduction

定型素材識別子(URI)は、簡素で拡張可能な、素材を識別するための手段です。このURI語法及び意味論の仕様書は、専ら1990年以来そのようなオブジェクトを使用してきた World Wide Web の世界で紹介され、『 WWW Universal Resource Identifiers 』[ RFC1630 ] で描写された概念に由来しています。URIの仕様書は、"Functional Recommendations for Internet Resource Locators" [RFC1736]と"Functional Requirements for Uniform Resource Names" [RFC1737]で主張された勧告を結合するように設計されています。
Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI) provide a simple and extensible means for identifying a resource. This specification of URI syntax and semantics is derived from concepts introduced by the World Wide Web global information initiative, whose use of such objects dates from 1990 and is described in "Universal Resource Identifiers in WWW" [RFC1630]. The specification of URI is designed to meet the recommendations laid out in "Functional Recommendations for Internet Resource Locators" [RFC1736] and "Functional Requirements for Uniform Resource Names" [RFC1737].

この文書は、全ての URI のための単一で一般的な語法を定義するために、"Uniform Resource Locators" [ RFC1738 ] と"Relative Uniform Resource Locators" [ RFC1808 ] を更新し、統合します。 RFC 1738 にある個別の URL 用語の具体的な語法を定義した部分は外されます。それらの部分は新しい URI 用語の登録の際に別々の文書として更新されることでしょう。この文書では、US-ASCII文字セット[ASCII]以外の文字の取り扱いのための問題と勧告については論議されません。そのような勧告は、別々の文書で論議されることになります。
This document updates and merges "Uniform Resource Locators" [RFC1738] and "Relative Uniform Resource Locators" [RFC1808] in order to define a single, generic syntax for all URI. It excludes those portions of RFC 1738 that defined the specific syntax of individual URL schemes; those portions will be updated as separate documents, as will the process for registration of new URI schemes. This document does not discuss the issues and recommendation for dealing with characters outside of the US-ASCII character set [ASCII]; those recommendations are discussed in a separate document.

以前の RFCs からの重要な変化は全て、 付録 Gに記してあります。
All significant changes from the prior RFCs are noted in Appendix G.

1.1 URI概観 Overview of URI

URI are characterized by the following definitions:

定型 Uniform
定型にはいくつかの利点があります。 Uniformity provides several benefits: it allows different types of resource identifiers to be used in the same context, even when the mechanisms used to access those resources may differ; it allows uniform semantic interpretation of common syntactic conventions across different types of resource identifiers; it allows introduction of new types of resource identifiers without interfering with the way that existing identifiers are used; and, it allows the identifiers to be reused in many different contexts, thus permitting new applications or protocols to leverage a pre-existing, large, and widely-used set of resource identifiers.
素材 Resource
素材は、何であれ識別可能なものです。 よく知られている例では、電子文書・画像・サービス(『ロサンゼルスの本日の天気予報』など)他の素材の集まりを含みます。 人・会社・図書館にある本などをそれぞれ素材として捉えることもできますので、全ての素材がネットワークで『拾い上げできる』わけではありません。
素材は、実体か実体の集合への概念的な写像であり、その実体の写像が一斉に個別の実例に対応する必要はないのです。 従って、処理過程での概念的な写像が変化しなければ、時間が経ったら素材の内容(そのとき、それが対応する実体)が変わるときでも、相変わらず素材を保持することができます。
A resource can be anything that has identity. Familiar examples include an electronic document, an image, a service (e.g., "today's weather report for Los Angeles"), and a collection of other resources. Not all resources are network "retrievable"; e.g., human beings, corporations, and bound books in a library can also be considered resources. The resource is the conceptual mapping to an entity or set of entities, not necessarily the entity which corresponds to that mapping at any particular instance in time. Thus, a resource can remain constant even when its content---the entities to which it currently corresponds---changes over time, provided that the conceptual mapping is not changed in the process.
識別子 Identifier
識別子は、識別可能な何かへの参照として動作するものです。 URI の場合は、限定された語法による字の連なりとなります。
An identifier is an object that can act as a reference to something that has identity. In the case of URI, the object is a sequence of characters with a restricted syntax.

素材は、`access', `update', `replace', `find attributes'などというような語によって特徴付けることができますので、素材を認識したシステムは、その素材についてさまざまな操作を施すことができます。
Having identified a resource, a system may perform a variety of operations on the resource, as might be characterized by such words as `access', `update', `replace', or `find attributes'.

1.2. URI, URL, and URN

URI はさらに、位置表示か名前、あるいはその両方を兼ねるものとして分類することができます。 用語『 Uniform Resource Locator 』( URL )はどちらかというと、名前か他の属性による素材の認識方法というよりは、その主要な接続機構(そのネットワーク『ロケーション』など)での表現によって認識される URI の下位集合を表します。 用語『 Uniform Resource Name 』( URN )は、素材が存在しなくなるか利用できなくなっても、世界中に唯一で頑強であることを求められる URI の下位集合を表します。
A URI can be further classified as a locator, a name, or both. The term "Uniform Resource Locator" (URL) refers to the subset of URI that identify resources via a representation of their primary access mechanism (e.g., their network "location"), rather than identifying the resource by name or by some other attribute(s) of that resource. The term "Uniform Resource Name" (URN) refers to the subset of URI that are required to remain globally unique and persistent even when the resource ceases to exist or becomes unavailable.

URI 用語(第3項の1)は URI の namespace を定義するものですから、さらにこの用語を使っている識別子の語法と意味論を限定することができます。 この仕様書では、 そのようなURI 語法の要素で、全ての URI 用語について必須であるか、または多くの URI 用語に共通のものを定義します。 従ってこれは、用語依存意味論が必要とされるまでURI の用語依存取り扱いを先送りできるような、用語とは無関係なURI 参照の検証機構を実装するのに必要な語法と意味論を定義することになります。 以下、位置表示にだけ適用する語法か意味論について描写するとき、用語 URL を使うことにします。
The URI scheme (Section 3.1) defines the namespace of the URI, and thus may further restrict the syntax and semantics of identifiers using that scheme. This specification defines those elements of the URI syntax that are either required of all URI schemes or are common to many URI schemes. It thus defines the syntax and semantics that are needed to implement a scheme-independent parsing mechanism for URI references, such that the scheme-dependent handling of a URI can be postponed until the scheme-dependent semantics are needed. We use the term URL below when describing syntax or semantics that only apply to locators.

多くの URL 用語は作法の後に指定されるのではありますが、 URL の素材を呼び出す唯一の方法が指定された作法であるというわけではありません。 ゲートウェイ・プロキシ・キャッシュ、そしてネームリゾルーションサービスは、それぞれ元の作法とは無関係に素材へのアクセスに使用されたはずだし、 URL の分析結果によっては複数の作法を要求できることもあります。たとえば、"http" URL の素材を呼び出そうとして、それがローカルなキャッシュに見つからないときには、DNS と HTTP が使用されます。
Although many URL schemes are named after protocols, this does not imply that the only way to access the URL's resource is via the named protocol. Gateways, proxies, caches, and name resolution services might be used to access some resources, independent of the protocol of their origin, and the resolution of some URL may require the use of more than one protocol (e.g., both DNS and HTTP are typically used to access an "http" URL's resource when it can't be found in a local cache).

URN は、 その主要な目的が、識別子を持つ素材へ粘り強いラベルを貼ることである点においてURL と異なります。 その識別子は定義済み namespaces 集合の1つから引き出され、その各々に独自の名前構造集合と割り当て手続きがあります。 "urn"用語は、『 URN Syntax 』 [ RFC2141 ] と関連仕様書で定義される標準化された URN namespace の必要条件を確立するために予約されているものです。
A URN differs from a URL in that it's primary purpose is persistent labeling of a resource with an identifier. That identifier is drawn from one of a set of defined namespaces, each of which has its own set name structure and assignment procedures. The "urn" scheme has been reserved to establish the requirements for a standardized URN namespace, as defined in "URN Syntax" [RFC2141] and its related specifications.

非常に変化に富んだ構文の使用や、しばしば階層的な namespace を持つことが可能とされているので、この仕様書では多くの例によって URL を説明します。 URI 構文の構文解析器には、 URL 参照と URN 参照の両方を一般的な URI として解析する能力があります。ということは、いったん用語が確定されたら、用語-特性分析は、一般的な URI 構成要素でなされることができるわけです。 言い換えれば URI 構文は、全ての URI 用語の構文の上位集合です。
Most of the examples in this specification demonstrate URL, since they allow the most varied use of the syntax and often have a hierarchical namespace. A parser of the URI syntax is capable of parsing both URL and URN references as a generic URI; once the scheme is determined, the scheme-specific parsing can be performed on the generic URI components. In other words, the URI syntax is a superset of the syntax of all URI schemes.

1.3. URIの例 Example URI

The following examples illustrate URI that are in common use.

      -- ftp scheme for File Transfer Protocol services

      -- gopher scheme for Gopher and Gopher+ Protocol services

      -- http scheme for Hypertext Transfer Protocol services

      -- mailto scheme for electronic mail addresses

      -- news scheme for USENET news groups and articles

      -- telnet scheme for interactive services via the TELNET Protocol

1.4. 階層的URIと相対表現 Hierarchical URI and Relative Forms

絶対識別子は、識別子が使用された文脈とは無関係に、素材を参照します。 これとは逆に、相対識別子は、そのときの文脈と素材の絶対識別子との差分を、階層的な namespace において描写することによって素材を参照します。
An absolute identifier refers to a resource independent of the context in which the identifier is used. In contrast, a relative identifier refers to a resource by describing the difference within a hierarchical namespace between the current context and an absolute identifier of the resource.

階層的指定システムを扱う URI 用語もあります。これは、名前の階層構造が、用語中の構成要素を分ける "/" 区切り子によって示されているものです。 この文書では、 URI 参照の用語とは無関係な「相対」形態を定義します。これは他の URI を生成するために、(階層的な用語で)「基盤」 URI と組み合わせて使用できるものです。 階層的 URI の構文は第3項で描写され、相対的 URI の計算は第5項で描写されます。
Some URI schemes support a hierarchical naming system, where the hierarchy of the name is denoted by a "/" delimiter separating the components in the scheme. This document defines a scheme-independent `relative' form of URI reference that can be used in conjunction with a `base' URI (of a hierarchical scheme) to produce another URI. The syntax of hierarchical URI is described in Section 3; the relative URI calculation is described in Section 5.

1.5. URI転記能力 URI Transcribability

URI 構文は、世界的な転記能力を第一に留意して設計されました。 URI は、ごく限られた集合すなわち、基本的なラテン語アルファベット・数字・特殊文字からなる文字の連なりです。 URI は、紙の上のインクやスクリーン上のピクセルや符号化文字中の一連のオクテットなど、さまざまな方法で表すことができます。 URI の解釈は使われた文字にのみ依存するのであり、その文字がネットワークプロトコルで表わされた方法には依存しません。
The URI syntax was designed with global transcribability as one of its main concerns. A URI is a sequence of characters from a very limited set, i.e. the letters of the basic Latin alphabet, digits, and a few special characters. A URI may be represented in a variety of ways: e.g., ink on paper, pixels on a screen, or a sequence of octets in a coded character set. The interpretation of a URI depends only on the characters used and not how those characters are represented in a network protocol.

転記能力の目指すべきところは、簡単な筋書きによって描写できます。 国際的な会議に行った2人の研究者、 Sam とKimがパブに座り、意見を交換しているところを想像してください。 より多くの情報が得られる場所をSamがKimに聞くと、Kimはサイトの URI をナプキンに書きます。 Sam は自宅に戻るとナプキンを取り出し、Kimが参照した情報を拾い上げる URI をコンピュータに打ち込みます。
The goal of transcribability can be described by a simple scenario. Imagine two colleagues, Sam and Kim, sitting in a pub at an international conference and exchanging research ideas. Sam asks Kim for a location to get more information, so Kim writes the URI for the research site on a napkin. Upon returning home, Sam takes out the napkin and types the URI into a computer, which then retrieves the information to which Kim referred.

There are several design concerns revealed by the scenario:

これらの設計注意点は、必ずしも整合してはいません。 例えば、URI 構成要素の最も意味のある名前に、システムによっては打ち込めない文字が必要なことがあります。 1つの媒体から他のものに素材識別子を転記する能力は、その URI が最も意味のある構成要素から成り立っていることよりも重要であると考えられます。 局地的または地域的文脈では、テクノロジーの進展によってより広い範囲の文字を使うことができるようになると、利用者は利益を得るかもしれません。しかしそのような用法は、この文書では定義しません。
These design concerns are not always in alignment. For example, it is often the case that the most meaningful name for a URI component would require characters that cannot be typed into some systems. The ability to transcribe the resource identifier from one medium to another was considered more important than having its URI consist of the most meaningful of components. In local and regional contexts and with improving technology, users might benefit from being able to use a wider range of characters; such use is not defined in this document.

1.6. Syntax Notation and Common Elements

この文書では、 URI の構文を描写し定義するのに2つの取り決めを使います。 まず、レイアウト形態と呼ばれる、構成要素と構成要素分離子の一般的な記述順序は
This document uses two conventions to describe and define the syntax for URI. The first, called the layout form, is a general description of the order of components and component separators, as in


構成要素名前は、山形かっこで囲われます。そして山形かっこの外側の文字は、文字分離子となります。空白は無視されます。 これらの記述は非公式に使用されるものであり、構文必要条件を定義するものではありません。
The component names are enclosed in angle-brackets and any characters outside angle-brackets are literal separators. Whitespace should be ignored. These descriptions are used informally and do not define the syntax requirements.

第2の取り決めは、形式的な URI 構文を定義するのに使用される BNF的文法です。 "|"が代替物に使用されることを除いては、文法は [ RFC822 ] のそれです。 簡単に言うと、規則は等号"="によって定義から分離され、規則定義を2行以上続けるためには字下げが使用され、文字列は""をもって引用され、グループ要素には括弧"("と")"が使用され、オプショナルな要素は鍵括弧"["と"]"で包まれ、要素は次の要素を n 回以上反復するのに <n>* の形で書くことができます。なお、n の既定値は 0 です。
The second convention is a BNF-like grammar, used to define the formal URI syntax. The grammar is that of [RFC822], except that "|" is used to designate alternatives. Briefly, rules are separated from definitions by an equal "=", indentation is used to continue a rule definition over more than one line, literals are quoted with "", parentheses "(" and ")" are used to group elements, optional elements are enclosed in "[" and "]" brackets, and elements may be preceded with <n>* to designate n or more repetitions of the following element; n defaults to 0.

作法において許されたバイト(オクテット)を定義するのにBNF的文法を使う多くの仕様書とは異なり、 URI 文法は文字に関して定義されます。 文法中の各々の文字列は、なにか特定の符号化文字セットでのオクテット符号にではなく、それが表わす文字に対応することになります。 オンラインでのビットとバイトの用語によるURI の表し方は、その輸送手段に使用されたプロトコルの文字符号化方式かそれを含む文書の文字セットに依存します。
Unlike many specifications that use a BNF-like grammar to define the bytes (octets) allowed by a protocol, the URI grammar is defined in terms of characters. Each literal in the grammar corresponds to the character it represents, rather than to the octet encoding of that character in any particular coded character set. How a URI is represented in terms of bits and bytes on the wire is dependent upon the character encoding of the protocol used to transport it, or the charset of the document which contains it.

The following definitions are common to many elements:

alpha = lowalpha | upalpha

lowalpha = "a" | "b" | "c" | "d" | "e" | "f" | "g" | "h" | "i" | "j" | "k" | "l" | "m" | "n" | "o" | "p" | "q" | "r" | "s" | "t" | "u" | "v" | "w" | "x" | "y" | "z"

upalpha = "A" | "B" | "C" | "D" | "E" | "F" | "G" | "H" | "I" | "J" | "K" | "L" | "M" | "N" | "O" | "P" | "Q" | "R" | "S" | "T" | "U" | "V" | "W" | "X" | "Y" | "Z"

digit = "0" | "1" | "2" | "3" | "4" | "5" | "6" | "7" | "8" | "9"

alphanum = alpha | digit

全URI語法は、付録Aにまとめてあります。 The complete URI syntax is collected in Appendix A.

2. URI文字と回避単位
URI Characters and Escape Sequences

URI は限定された文字の集合から成り立つもので、その文字は主に、コンピュータシステムとコンピュータ外のコミュニケーションの双方に於いて転記能力と使い勝手を助けるように選ばれています。 慣例通りに URI のまわりの区切り子として使われた文字は排除されます。 限定された文字の集合は、数字、文字、そして文字符号化形式やインターネット利用者に利用される入力装置の大半に共通のものから選ばれた2、3の象形記号から成り立ちます。
URI consist of a restricted set of characters, primarily chosen to aid transcribability and usability both in computer systems and in non-computer communications. Characters used conventionally as delimiters around URI were excluded. The restricted set of characters consists of digits, letters, and a few graphic symbols were chosen from those common to most of the character encodings and input facilities available to Internet users.

      uric          = reserved | unreserved | escaped

文字は区切り子としても、また区切られた一部分のデータ(オクテット)の文字列を表わすものとしても使用されます。 オクテットは文字によって直接表される(そのオクテットにはUS-ASCII文字を使う[ASCII])か、回避符号化によって表されます。 この表現は、以下で詳述されます。
Within a URI, characters are either used as delimiters, or to represent strings of data (octets) within the delimited portions. Octets are either represented directly by a character (using the US- ASCII character for that octet [ASCII]) or by an escape encoding. This representation is elaborated below.

2.1 URI and non-ASCII characters

URIと文字との関係は、US-ASCIIに含まれない文字にとっては混乱の原因となってきました。この関係をはっきりさせるには、『文字』(区別できる意味に関する実体として)と『オクテット』(8ビットのバイト)との相違を見分けることが大切になってきます。 1つにはURI 文字からオクテットへ、2つ目にはオクテットから元の文字への2通りの写像変換があることになります。
The relationship between URI and characters has been a source of confusion for characters that are not part of US-ASCII. To describe the relationship, it is useful to distinguish between a "character" (as a distinguishable semantic entity) and an "octet" (an 8-bit byte). There are two mappings, one from URI characters to octets, and a second from octets to original characters:

   URI 文字単位->オクテット単位->元の文字単位

URI は文字単位で表わされるのであって、オクテット単位で表わされるのではありません。 これはURI が、印刷物やラジオでの読み上げなど、コンピュータネットワークを介さない方法によって『輸送』されるかもしれないからです。
A URI is represented as a sequence of characters, not as a sequence of octets. That is because URI might be "transported" by means that are not through a computer network, e.g., printed on paper, read over the radio, etc.

URI 用語は、 URI 文字からオクテットへの写像を限定できます。これが行なわれるかどうかは用語によります。 一般に、区切られたURI の構成要素において、一連の文字を使って一連のオクテットを表わすことができます。 例えば、文字連続"%", "0", "a"はオクテット 10 (十進法)を表し、文字"a"はオクテット 97 (十進法)を表します。
A URI scheme may define a mapping from URI characters to octets; whether this is done depends on the scheme. Commonly, within a delimited component of a URI, a sequence of characters may be used to represent a sequence of octets. For example, the character "a" represents the octet 97 (decimal), while the character sequence "%", "0", "a" represents the octet 10 (decimal).

素材によっては、第2の翻訳があります。 URI の構成要素によって定義されるオクテットの連続がその後、一連の文字を表わすのに使用されるのです。 'charset'は、この変換過程を定義します。 インターネットプロトコルでは、多くの charsets が使用されています。 例えば UTF-8 [ UTF-8 ] は、オクテットの連続から、国際標準化機構 10646 のレパートリーにある文字の連続への変換を定義します。
There is a second translation for some resources: the sequence of octets defined by a component of the URI is subsequently used to represent a sequence of characters. A 'charset' defines this mapping. There are many charsets in use in Internet protocols. For example, UTF-8 [UTF-8] defines a mapping from sequences of octets to sequences of characters in the repertoire of ISO 10646.

最も単純なケースでは、元の文字単位はUS-ASCIIで定義される文字だけを含み、写像変換の2つのレベルを単純かつ容易に往復できます。 「元の文字」は各々、US-ASCIIコードのオクテットとして表わされます。逆に、そのオクテットはUS-ASCII文字か"%"回避単位のどちらとしても表わされます。
In the simplest case, the original character sequence contains only characters that are defined in US-ASCII, and the two levels of mapping are simple and easily invertible: each 'original character' is represented as the octet for the US-ASCII code for it, which is, in turn, represented as either the US-ASCII character, or else the "%" escape sequence for that octet.

これに対して、元の文字連続が非ASCII 文字を含むと、状況は難しくなります。 文字連続を表わしているはずのオクテット連続を伝送するインターネットプロトコルでは、複数の文字セットが使われている可能性がある場合、 charset を認識するための方法を与えることになってはいます [ RFC2277 ] 。 しかしながら今のところ、一般的な URI 構文にあるもので、この認識をなすものはありません。 個別の URI 用語になら、単一の charset を要求するか、既定の charset を定義するか、使われた charset を示す方法を与えることはできます。
For original character sequences that contain non-ASCII characters, however, the situation is more difficult. Internet protocols that transmit octet sequences intended to represent character sequences are expected to provide some way of identifying the charset used, if there might be more than one [RFC2277]. However, there is currently no provision within the generic URI syntax to accomplish this identification. An individual URI scheme may require a single charset, define a default charset, or provide a way to indicate the charset used.

URI における文字符号化形式の体系的な処理の開発は、この仕様書の今後の課題となるでしょう。
It is expected that a systematic treatment of character encoding within URI will be developed as a future modification of this specification.

2.2. 予約文字 Reserved Characters

多くの URI は、ある種の特殊文字から成り立つあるいは区切られる、構成要素を含みます。URI 構成要素におけるこれらの文字の使用法は、その予約されている目的に限られているので、これらは『予約済み』と呼ばれます。もし URI 構成要素のデータが予約された目的と衝突するならば、対立するデータは、 URI を形成する前に回避されなければなりません。
Many URI include components consisting of or delimited by, certain special characters. These characters are called "reserved", since their usage within the URI component is limited to their reserved purpose. If the data for a URI component would conflict with the reserved purpose, then the conflicting data must be escaped before forming the URI.

      reserved    = ";" | "/" | "?" | ":" | "@" | "&" | "=" | "+" |
                    "$" | ","

上記"reserved"構文級は、URIにおいて許された文字であるが、第3項に述べる区切り子の部品として使われ、一般URI構文の特定の部品にあっては許されていないかもしれない文字を参照します。 "reserved"集合中の文字は、全ての文脈において予約されているのではありません。与えられたURI部品において実際に予約された文字集合は、その部品によって定義されます。
The "reserved" syntax class above refers to those characters that are allowed within a URI, but which may not be allowed within a particular component of the generic URI syntax; they are used as delimiters of the components described in Section 3. Characters in the "reserved" set are not reserved in all contexts. The set of characters actually reserved within any given URI component is defined by that component. In general, a character is reserved if the semantics of the URI changes if the character is replaced with its escaped US-ASCII encoding.

2.3. 予約されていない文字 Unreserved Characters

URI で許されるが予約された目的がないデータ文字は、非予約文字と呼ばれます。 これは大文字・小文字(のアルファベット)、十進法の数字、そして句読点や記号の限られた集合を含みます。
Data characters that are allowed in a URI but do not have a reserved purpose are called unreserved. These include upper and lower case letters, decimal digits, and a limited set of punctuation marks and symbols.

      unreserved  = alphanum | mark

      mark        = "-" | "_" | "." | "!" | "~" | "*" | "'" | "(" | ")"

非予約文字は、 URI の意味論を変えることなく回避することができます。しかし URI が現れるために、 unescape された文字を許さない文脈で使用されているのでなければ、これは行なわれるべきではありません。
Unreserved characters can be escaped without changing the semantics of the URI, but this should not be done unless the URI is being used in a context that does not allow the unescaped character to appear.

2.4. 回避シーケンス Escape Sequences

非予約文字を使う表現をデータが持っていないならば、それは回避されなければなりません。 これは以下で説明するように、 US-ASCII 符号化文字集合の印刷可能な文字に当たらないか、許されていない US-ASCII 文字に当たるデータを含みます。
Data must be escaped if it does not have a representation using an unreserved character; this includes data that does not correspond to a printable character of the US-ASCII coded character set, or that corresponds to any US-ASCII character that is disallowed, as explained below.

2.4.1. 回避符号化 Escaped Encoding

回避されたオクテットは、文字三つ組へ符号化されます。これは、パーセント文字"%"と、その後に続くオクテットコードを表わしている16進法による数字2桁から構成されています。 例えば、"%20"はUS-ASCII空白文字の回避された符号化です。
An escaped octet is encoded as a character triplet, consisting of the percent character "%" followed by the two hexadecimal digits representing the octet code. For example, "%20" is the escaped encoding for the US-ASCII space character.

      escaped     = "%" hex hex
hex = digit | "A" | "B" | "C" | "D" | "E" | "F" |
"a" | "b" | "c" | "d" | "e" | "f"

2.4.2. 回避するときとしないとき When to Escape and Unescape

記入された URI を回避するしないはその意味論を変化させるかもしれないので、 URI は常に『回避された』形になっています。 通常は、回避符号化が安全に作られるのは、 URI がその構成要素部分から造り出されているときだけです; 各々の構成要素には、独自に予約された文字の集合を持たせてよいので、機構は、文字の回避によってその意味論が変わってしまうかどうかを判断できるような構成要素を生成あるいは解釈することのみに対応すればいいことになります。 同様に URI は、その構成要素における回避された文字が安全に復号されるようになる前に、構成要素に分けられなければなりません。
A URI is always in an "escaped" form, since escaping or unescaping a completed URI might change its semantics. Normally, the only time escape encodings can safely be made is when the URI is being created from its component parts; each component may have its own set of characters that are reserved, so only the mechanism responsible for generating or interpreting that component can determine whether or not escaping a character will change its semantics. Likewise, a URI must be separated into its components before the escaped characters within those components can be safely decoded.

場合によっては、非予約文字によって表せるデータが、回避されて現れるようにしてかまいません。例えば、非予約の"mark"文字のいくつかは、システムによっては自動的に回避されます。 与えられた URI 用語が正規表現アルゴリズムを定義するならば、非予約文字は、そのアルゴリズムに従ってそのまま通されてもかまいません。 例えば、『 %7e 』はしばしば http URL パスにおいて『 ~ 』の代わりに使用されますが、この2つは http URL に対して等価です。
In some cases, data that could be represented by an unreserved character may appear escaped; for example, some of the unreserved "mark" characters are automatically escaped by some systems. If the given URI scheme defines a canonicalization algorithm, then unreserved characters may be unescaped according to that algorithm. For example, "%7e" is sometimes used instead of "~" in an http URL path, but the two are equivalent for an http URL.

パーセント記号 "%" には常に、回避指標であるという予約された目的があるので、 "%25" を URI のデータとして使用する際は、これを回避しなければなりません。 実装に当たる者は、同一の文字列を繰り返して回避したりそのまま通したりしていないか気をつけるべきです。なぜなら、既にそのまま通した文字列をさらにそのまま通したら、パーセントデータ文字は誤って他の回避した文字として解釈されるかもしれず、既に回避された文字列をさらに回避したなら、その逆のことが言えるからです。
Because the percent "%" character always has the reserved purpose of being the escape indicator, it must be escaped as "%25" in order to be used as data within a URI. Implementers should be careful not to escape or unescape the same string more than once, since unescaping an already unescaped string might lead to misinterpreting a percent data character as another escaped character, or vice versa in the case of escaping an already escaped string.

2.4.3. 排除される US-ASCII 文字 Excluded US-ASCII Characters

Although they are disallowed within the URI syntax, we include here a description of those US-ASCII characters that have been excluded and the reasons for their exclusion.

The control characters in the US-ASCII coded character set are not used within a URI, both because they are non-printable and because they are likely to be misinterpreted by some control mechanisms.

   control     = <US-ASCII coded characters 00-1F and 7F hexadecimal>

The space character is excluded because significant spaces may disappear and insignificant spaces may be introduced when URI are transcribed or typeset or subjected to the treatment of wordprocessing programs. Whitespace is also used to delimit URI in many contexts.

   space       = <US-ASCII coded character 20 hexadecimal>

山形括弧 "<" と ">" そして二重引用符 (") は排除されます。なぜなら、これらはしばしばURI周辺の区切り子として文書や作法の分野で使われるからです。
"#" 記号は排除されます。なぜなら、これはURIを、URI参照中のフラグメント識別子(第4項)から区切るのに使われるからです。
The angle-bracket "<" and ">" and double-quote (") characters are excluded because they are often used as the delimiters around URI in text documents and protocol fields. The character "#" is excluded because it is used to delimit a URI from a fragment identifier in URI references (Section 4). The percent character "%" is excluded because it is used for the encoding of escaped characters.

   delims      = "<" | ">" | "#" | "%" | <">

Other characters are excluded because gateways and other transport agents are known to sometimes modify such characters, or they are used as delimiters.

   unwise      = "{" | "}" | "|" | "\" | "^" | "[" | "]" | "`"

Data corresponding to excluded characters must be escaped in order to be properly represented within a URI.

3. URI 語法部品群 URI Syntactic Components

The URI syntax is dependent upon the scheme. In general, absolute URI are written as follows:


絶対URIは使われている体系の名前(<scheme>)とそれに続くコロン (":") 、そしてその解釈が体系に依存する文字(the <scheme-specific-part>)を含みます。
An absolute URI contains the name of the scheme being used (<scheme>) followed by a colon (":") and then a string (the <scheme-specific- part>) whose interpretation depends on the scheme.

The URI syntax does not require that the scheme-specific-part have
any general structure or set of semantics which is common among all
URI. However, a subset of URI do share a common syntax for
representing hierarchical relationships within the namespace. This
"generic URI" syntax consists of a sequence of four main components:


<体系scheme>を除くそれぞれは、特定のURLからは姿を消しているかもしれません。例えば、URI体系の中には <典拠authority> 部品を許さないものがあり、他にも <照会query> 部品を使わないものがあります。
each of which, except <scheme>, may be absent from a particular URI. For example, some URI schemes do not allow an <authority> component, and others do not use a <query> component.

      絶対URI   = 体系scheme ":" ( hier_part | opaque_part )

階層的URIでは普通、斜線 "/" 文字を使って階層を区切ります。ファイルシステムによっては、 "/" 文字(URIの階層構造を示すのに使われる)は、ファイル名の階層を構成するのに使われる区切り子なので、URIパスはファイルのパス名によく似て見えることでしょう。ただしこれは、示された素材がファイルであるとか、URIが実際のファイルシステムに於けるパス名を反映しているとかいう意味ではありません。
URI that are hierarchical in nature use the slash "/" character for separating hierarchical components. For some file systems, a "/" character (used to denote the hierarchical structure of a URI) is the delimiter used to construct a file name hierarchy, and thus the URI path will look similar to a file pathname. This does NOT imply that the resource is a file or that the URI maps to an actual filesystem pathname.

      hier_part     = ( net_path | abs_path ) [ "?" query ]

      net_path      = "//" authority [ abs_path ]

      abs_path      = "/"  path_segments

階層部品を区切るのに斜線 "/" 文字を利用していないURIは、一般的なURI解析過程において、不透明であると判断されます。
URI that do not make use of the slash "/" character for separating hierarchical components are considered opaque by the generic URI parser.

      opaque_part   = uric_no_slash *uric

      uric_no_slash = unreserved | escaped | ";" | "?" | ":" | "@" |
                      "&" | "=" | "+" | "$" | ","

ここでは <abs_path> と <opaque_part> 構造物の両方を参照するのに、 <path> という言葉を使います。なぜなら、これらは与えられたいかなるURIに対しても相互に排他的であり、単一の部品として解析されうるからです。
We use the term <path> to refer to both the <abs_path> and <opaque_part> constructs, since they are mutually exclusive for any given URI and can be parsed as a single component.

3.1. 体系部品 Scheme Component

Just as there are many different methods of access to resources, there are a variety of schemes for identifying such resources. The URI syntax consists of a sequence of components separated by reserved characters, with the first component defining the semantics for the remainder of the URI string.

体系名は、小文字で始まり続いて小文字・数字・正負 (+ -)・点(.)の組み合わせになる文字一列から成り立ちます。間違いを大目に見るために、URI解析プログラムは、体系名における大文字を小文字と同等のもの(例えば、 "HTTP" を "http"に等しいものとするなど)として扱うべきです。
Scheme names consist of a sequence of characters beginning with a lower case letter and followed by any combination of lower case letters, digits, plus ("+"), period ("."), or hyphen ("-"). For resiliency, programs interpreting URI should treat upper case letters as equivalent to lower case in scheme names (e.g., allow "HTTP" as well as "http").

      scheme        = alpha *( alpha | digit | "+" | "-" | "." )

相対URI参照は、スキーム名で始まってはいない点で絶対URIから区別されます。その代わり、第5項2号に記してあるとおり、そのスキームは基盤 URI から継承されます。
Relative URI references are distinguished from absolute URI in that they do not begin with a scheme name. Instead, the scheme is inherited from the base URI, as described in Section 5.2.

3.2. 典拠部品 Authority Component

 多くの URI 体系は、命名典拠最上位階層の要素を含みます。URI の残りの部分で定義される名前空間が、その典拠によって規定されるようにです。この典拠部品は典型的には、インターネットに据えられたサーバあるいは命名典拠の体系特定登記によって定義されます。
Many URI schemes include a top hierarchical element for a naming authority, such that the namespace defined by the remainder of the URI is governed by that authority. This authority component is typically defined by an Internet-based server or a scheme-specific registry of naming authorities.

      authority     = server | reg_name

 典拠部品は二重スラッシュ "//" で始められ、次のスラッシュ "/"・疑問符 "?"あるいは URI の終わりで終端されます。典拠部品の範囲内では、文字 ";" ":" "@" "?" "/" は予約されています。
The authority component is preceded by a double slash "//" and is terminated by the next slash "/", question-mark "?", or by the end of the URI. Within the authority component, the characters ";", ":", "@", "?", and "/" are reserved.

 典拠部品は、相対参照を使う URI 体系には必要とされません。典拠部品のない基盤 URI は、どの相対参照も典拠部品を持たないであろうことを示唆します。
An authority component is not required for a URI scheme to make use of relative references. A base URI without an authority component implies that any relative reference will also be without an authority component.

3.2.1. Registry-based Naming Authority

The structure of a registry-based naming authority is specific to the
URI scheme, but constrained to the allowed characters for an
authority component.

reg_name = 1*( unreserved | escaped | "$" | "," |
";" | ":" | "@" | "&" | "=" | "+" )

3.2.2. Server-based Naming Authority

URL schemes that involve the direct use of an IP-based protocol to a
specified server on the Internet use a common syntax for the server
component of the URI's scheme-specific data:


where <userinfo> may consist of a user name and, optionally, scheme-
specific information about how to gain authorization to access the
server. The parts "<userinfo>@" and ":<port>" may be omitted.

server = [ [ userinfo "@" ] hostport ]

The user information, if present, is followed by a commercial at-sign

userinfo = *( unreserved | escaped |
";" | ":" | "&" | "=" | "+" | "$" | "," )

Some URL schemes use the format "user:password" in the userinfo
field. This practice is NOT RECOMMENDED, because the passing of
authentication information in clear text (such as URI) has proven to
be a security risk in almost every case where it has been used.

The host is a domain name of a network host, or its IPv4 address as a
set of four decimal digit groups separated by ".". Literal IPv6
addresses are not supported.

hostport = host [ ":" port ]
host = hostname | IPv4address
hostname = *( domainlabel "." ) toplabel [ "." ]
domainlabel = alphanum | alphanum *( alphanum | "-" ) alphanum
toplabel = alpha | alpha *( alphanum | "-" ) alphanum

Berners-Lee, et. al. Standards Track [Page 13]

RFC 2396 URI Generic Syntax August 1998

IPv4address = 1*digit "." 1*digit "." 1*digit "." 1*digit
port = *digit

Hostnames take the form described in Section 3 of [RFC1034] and
Section 2.1 of [RFC1123]: a sequence of domain labels separated by
".", each domain label starting and ending with an alphanumeric
character and possibly also containing "-" characters. The rightmost
domain label of a fully qualified domain name will never start with a
digit, thus syntactically distinguishing domain names from IPv4
addresses, and may be followed by a single "." if it is necessary to
distinguish between the complete domain name and any local domain.
To actually be "Uniform" as a resource locator, a URL hostname should
be a fully qualified domain name. In practice, however, the host
component may be a local domain literal.

Note: A suitable representation for including a literal IPv6
address as the host part of a URL is desired, but has not yet been
determined or implemented in practice.

The port is the network port number for the server. Most schemes
designate protocols that have a default port number. Another port
number may optionally be supplied, in decimal, separated from the
host by a colon. If the port is omitted, the default port number is

3.3. Path Component

The path component contains data, specific to the authority (or the
scheme if there is no authority component), identifying the resource
within the scope of that scheme and authority.

path = [ abs_path | opaque_part ]

path_segments = segment *( "/" segment )
segment = *pchar *( ";" param )
param = *pchar

pchar = unreserved | escaped |
":" | "@" | "&" | "=" | "+" | "$" | ","

The path may consist of a sequence of path segments separated by a
single slash "/" character. Within a path segment, the characters
"/", ";", "=", and "?" are reserved. Each path segment may include a
sequence of parameters, indicated by the semicolon ";" character.
The parameters are not significant to the parsing of relative

Berners-Lee, et. al. Standards Track [Page 14]

RFC 2396 URI Generic Syntax August 1998

3.4. Query Component

The query component is a string of information to be interpreted by
the resource.

query = *uric

Within a query component, the characters ";", "/", "?", ":", "@",
"&", "=", "+", ",", and "$" are reserved.

4. URI References

The term "URI-reference" is used here to denote the common usage of a
resource identifier. A URI reference may be absolute or relative,
and may have additional information attached in the form of a
fragment identifier. However, "the URI" that results from such a
reference includes only the absolute URI after the fragment
identifier (if any) is removed and after any relative URI is resolved
to its absolute form. Although it is possible to limit the
discussion of URI syntax and semantics to that of the absolute
result, most usage of URI is within general URI references, and it is
impossible to obtain the URI from such a reference without also
parsing the fragment and resolving the relative form.

URI-reference = [ absoluteURI | relativeURI ] [ "#" fragment ]

The syntax for relative URI is a shortened form of that for absolute
URI, where some prefix of the URI is missing and certain path
components ("." and "..") have a special meaning when, and only when,
interpreting a relative path. The relative URI syntax is defined in
Section 5.

4.1. Fragment Identifier

When a URI reference is used to perform a retrieval action on the
identified resource, the optional fragment identifier, separated from
the URI by a crosshatch ("#") character, consists of additional
reference information to be interpreted by the user agent after the
retrieval action has been successfully completed. As such, it is not
part of a URI, but is often used in conjunction with a URI.

fragment = *uric

The semantics of a fragment identifier is a property of the data
resulting from a retrieval action, regardless of the type of URI used
in the reference. Therefore, the format and interpretation of
fragment identifiers is dependent on the media type [RFC2046] of the
retrieval result. The character restrictions described in Section 2

Berners-Lee, et. al. Standards Track [Page 15]

RFC 2396 URI Generic Syntax August 1998

for URI also apply to the fragment in a URI-reference. Individual
media types may define additional restrictions or structure within
the fragment for specifying different types of "partial views" that
can be identified within that media type.

A fragment identifier is only meaningful when a URI reference is
intended for retrieval and the result of that retrieval is a document
for which the identified fragment is consistently defined.

4.2. Same-document References

A URI reference that does not contain a URI is a reference to the
current document. In other words, an empty URI reference within a
document is interpreted as a reference to the start of that document,
and a reference containing only a fragment identifier is a reference
to the identified fragment of that document. Traversal of such a
reference should not result in an additional retrieval action.
However, if the URI reference occurs in a context that is always
intended to result in a new request, as in the case of HTML's FORM
element, then an empty URI reference represents the base URI of the
current document and should be replaced by that URI when transformed
into a request.

4.3. Parsing a URI Reference

A URI reference is typically parsed according to the four main
components and fragment identifier in order to determine what
components are present and whether the reference is relative or
absolute. The individual components are then parsed for their
subparts and, if not opaque, to verify their validity.

Although the BNF defines what is allowed in each component, it is
ambiguous in terms of differentiating between an authority component
and a path component that begins with two slash characters. The
greedy algorithm is used for disambiguation: the left-most matching
rule soaks up as much of the URI reference string as it is capable of
matching. In other words, the authority component wins.

Readers familiar with regular expressions should see Appendix B for a
concrete parsing example and test oracle.

5. Relative URI References

It is often the case that a group or "tree" of documents has been
constructed to serve a common purpose; the vast majority of URI in
these documents point to resources within the tree rather than

Berners-Lee, et. al. Standards Track [Page 16]

RFC 2396 URI Generic Syntax August 1998

outside of it. Similarly, documents located at a particular site are
much more likely to refer to other resources at that site than to
resources at remote sites.

Relative addressing of URI allows document trees to be partially
independent of their location and access scheme. For instance, it is
possible for a single set of hypertext documents to be simultaneously
accessible and traversable via each of the "file", "http", and "ftp"
schemes if the documents refer to each other using relative URI.
Furthermore, such document trees can be moved, as a whole, without
changing any of the relative references. Experience within the WWW
has demonstrated that the ability to perform relative referencing is
necessary for the long-term usability of embedded URI.

The syntax for relative URI takes advantage of the <hier_part> syntax
of <absoluteURI> (Section 3) in order to express a reference that is
relative to the namespace of another hierarchical URI.

relativeURI = ( net_path | abs_path | rel_path ) [ "?" query ]

A relative reference beginning with two slash characters is termed a
network-path reference, as defined by <net_path> in Section 3. Such
references are rarely used.

A relative reference beginning with a single slash character is
termed an absolute-path reference, as defined by <abs_path> in
Section 3.

A relative reference that does not begin with a scheme name or a
slash character is termed a relative-path reference.

rel_path = rel_segment [ abs_path ]

rel_segment = 1*( unreserved | escaped |
";" | "@" | "&" | "=" | "+" | "$" | "," )

相対パス参照においては、全パスセグメントの"."と".."には特別の意味があり、それぞれ『そのときの階層水準』と『この階層水準の上の水準』を示します。 これは、 Unix用ファイルシステムにおいてディレクトリレベルを示すための用法にごく近いものではありますが、これらのパス構成要素が特別のものとされるのは、相対パス参照をその絶対形(第5項の2)へ読み換えるときだけです。
Within a relative-path reference, the complete path segments "." and ".." have special meanings: "the current hierarchy level" and "the level above this hierarchy level", respectively. Although this is very similar to their use within Unix-based filesystems to indicate directory levels, these path components are only considered special when resolving a relative-path reference to its absolute form (Section 5.2).

Authors should be aware that a path segment which contains a colon
character cannot be used as the first segment of a relative URI path
(e.g., "this:that"), because it would be mistaken for a scheme name.

Berners-Lee, et. al. Standards Track [Page 17]

RFC 2396 URI Generic Syntax August 1998

It is therefore necessary to precede such segments with other
segments (e.g., "./this:that") in order for them to be referenced as
a relative path.

It is not necessary for all URI within a given scheme to be
restricted to the <hier_part> syntax, since the hierarchical
properties of that syntax are only necessary when relative URI are
used within a particular document. Documents can only make use of
relative URI when their base URI fits within the <hier_part> syntax.
It is assumed that any document which contains a relative reference
will also have a base URI that obeys the syntax. In other words,
relative URI cannot be used within a document that has an unsuitable
base URI.

Some URI schemes do not allow a hierarchical syntax matching the
<hier_part> syntax, and thus cannot use relative references.

5.1. Establishing a Base URI

The term "relative URI" implies that there exists some absolute "base
URI" against which the relative reference is applied. Indeed, the
base URI is necessary to define the semantics of any relative URI
reference; without it, a relative reference is meaningless. In order
for relative URI to be usable within a document, the base URI of that
document must be known to the parser.

The base URI of a document can be established in one of four ways,
listed below in order of precedence. The order of precedence can be
thought of in terms of layers, where the innermost defined base URI
has the highest precedence. This can be visualized graphically as:

| .----------------------------------------------------. |
| | .----------------------------------------------. | |
| | | .----------------------------------------. | | |
| | | | .----------------------------------. | | | |
| | | | | <relative_reference> | | | | |
| | | | `----------------------------------' | | | |
| | | | (5.1.1) Base URI embedded in the | | | |
| | | | document's content | | | |
| | | `----------------------------------------' | | |
| | | (5.1.2) Base URI of the encapsulating entity | | |
| | | (message, document, or none). | | |
| | `----------------------------------------------' | |
| | (5.1.3) URI used to retrieve the entity | |
| `----------------------------------------------------' |
| (5.1.4) Default Base URI is application-dependent |

Berners-Lee, et. al. Standards Track [Page 18]

RFC 2396 URI Generic Syntax August 1998

5.1.1. Base URI within Document Content

Within certain document media types, the base URI of the document can
be embedded within the content itself such that it can be readily
obtained by a parser. This can be useful for descriptive documents,
such as tables of content, which may be transmitted to others through
protocols other than their usual retrieval context (e.g., E-Mail or
USENET news).

It is beyond the scope of this document to specify how, for each
media type, the base URI can be embedded. It is assumed that user
agents manipulating such media types will be able to obtain the
appropriate syntax from that media type's specification. An example
of how the base URI can be embedded in the Hypertext Markup Language
(HTML) [RFC1866] is provided in Appendix D.

A mechanism for embedding the base URI within MIME container types
(e.g., the message and multipart types) is defined by MHTML
[RFC2110]. Protocols that do not use the MIME message header syntax,
but which do allow some form of tagged metainformation to be included
within messages, may define their own syntax for defining the base
URI as part of a message.

5.1.2. Base URI from the Encapsulating Entity

If no base URI is embedded, the base URI of a document is defined by
the document's retrieval context. For a document that is enclosed
within another entity (such as a message or another document), the
retrieval context is that entity; thus, the default base URI of the
document is the base URI of the entity in which the document is

5.1.3. Base URI from the Retrieval URI

If no base URI is embedded and the document is not encapsulated
within some other entity (e.g., the top level of a composite entity),
then, if a URI was used to retrieve the base document, that URI shall
be considered the base URI. Note that if the retrieval was the
result of a redirected request, the last URI used (i.e., that which
resulted in the actual retrieval of the document) is the base URI.

5.1.4. Default Base URI

If none of the conditions described in Sections 5.1.1--5.1.3 apply,
then the base URI is defined by the context of the application.
Since this definition is necessarily application-dependent, failing

Berners-Lee, et. al. Standards Track [Page 19]

RFC 2396 URI Generic Syntax August 1998

to define the base URI using one of the other methods may result in
the same content being interpreted differently by different types of

It is the responsibility of the distributor(s) of a document
containing relative URI to ensure that the base URI for that document
can be established. It must be emphasized that relative URI cannot
be used reliably in situations where the document's base URI is not

5.2. Resolving Relative References to Absolute Form

This section describes an example algorithm for resolving URI
references that might be relative to a given base URI.

The base URI is established according to the rules of Section 5.1 and
parsed into the four main components as described in Section 3. Note
that only the scheme component is required to be present in the base
URI; the other components may be empty or undefined. A component is
undefined if its preceding separator does not appear in the URI
reference; the path component is never undefined, though it may be
empty. The base URI's query component is not used by the resolution
algorithm and may be discarded.

For each URI reference, the following steps are performed in order:

1) The URI reference is parsed into the potential four components and
fragment identifier, as described in Section 4.3.

2) If the path component is empty and the scheme, authority, and
query components are undefined, then it is a reference to the
current document and we are done. Otherwise, the reference URI's
query and fragment components are defined as found (or not found)
within the URI reference and not inherited from the base URI.

3) If the scheme component is defined, indicating that the reference
starts with a scheme name, then the reference is interpreted as an
absolute URI and we are done. Otherwise, the reference URI's
scheme is inherited from the base URI's scheme component.

Due to a loophole in prior specifications [RFC1630], some parsers
allow the scheme name to be present in a relative URI if it is the
same as the base URI scheme. Unfortunately, this can conflict
with the correct parsing of non-hierarchical URI. For backwards
compatibility, an implementation may work around such references
by removing the scheme if it matches that of the base URI and the
scheme is known to always use the <hier_part> syntax. The parser

Berners-Lee, et. al. Standards Track [Page 20]

RFC 2396 URI Generic Syntax August 1998

can then continue with the steps below for the remainder of the
reference components. Validating parsers should mark such a
misformed relative reference as an error.

4) If the authority component is defined, then the reference is a
network-path and we skip to step 7. Otherwise, the reference
URI's authority is inherited from the base URI's authority
component, which will also be undefined if the URI scheme does not
use an authority component.

5) If the path component begins with a slash character ("/"), then
the reference is an absolute-path and we skip to step 7.

6) If this step is reached, then we are resolving a relative-path
reference. The relative path needs to be merged with the base
URI's path. Although there are many ways to do this, we will
describe a simple method using a separate string buffer.

a) All but the last segment of the base URI's path component is
copied to the buffer. In other words, any characters after the
last (right-most) slash character, if any, are excluded.

b) The reference's path component is appended to the buffer

c) All occurrences of "./", where "." is a complete path segment,
are removed from the buffer string.

d) If the buffer string ends with "." as a complete path segment,
that "." is removed.

e) All occurrences of "<segment>/../", where <segment> is a
complete path segment not equal to "..", are removed from the
buffer string. Removal of these path segments is performed
iteratively, removing the leftmost matching pattern on each
iteration, until no matching pattern remains.

f) If the buffer string ends with "<segment>/..", where <segment>
is a complete path segment not equal to "..", that
"<segment>/.." is removed.

g) If the resulting buffer string still begins with one or more
complete path segments of "..", then the reference is
considered to be in error. Implementations may handle this
error by retaining these components in the resolved path (i.e.,
treating them as part of the final URI), by removing them from
the resolved path (i.e., discarding relative levels above the
root), or by avoiding traversal of the reference.

Berners-Lee, et. al. Standards Track [Page 21]

RFC 2396 URI Generic Syntax August 1998

h) The remaining buffer string is the reference URI's new path

7) The resulting URI components, including any inherited from the
base URI, are recombined to give the absolute form of the URI
reference. Using pseudocode, this would be

result = ""

if scheme is defined then
append scheme to result
append ":" to result

if authority is defined then
append "//" to result
append authority to result

append path to result

if query is defined then
append "?" to result
append query to result

if fragment is defined then
append "#" to result
append fragment to result

return result

Note that we must be careful to preserve the distinction between a
component that is undefined, meaning that its separator was not
present in the reference, and a component that is empty, meaning
that the separator was present and was immediately followed by the
next component separator or the end of the reference.

The above algorithm is intended to provide an example by which the
output of implementations can be tested -- implementation of the
algorithm itself is not required. For example, some systems may find
it more efficient to implement step 6 as a pair of segment stacks
being merged, rather than as a series of string pattern replacements.

Note: Some WWW client applications will fail to separate the
reference's query component from its path component before merging
the base and reference paths in step 6 above. This may result in
a loss of information if the query component contains the strings
"/../" or "/./".

Resolution examples are provided in Appendix C.

Berners-Lee, et. al. Standards Track [Page 22]

RFC 2396 URI Generic Syntax August 1998

6. URI Normalization and Equivalence

In many cases, different URI strings may actually identify the
identical resource. For example, the host names used in URL are
actually case insensitive, and the URL <http://www.XEROX.com> is
equivalent to <http://www.xerox.com>. In general, the rules for
equivalence and definition of a normal form, if any, are scheme
dependent. When a scheme uses elements of the common syntax, it will
also use the common syntax equivalence rules, namely that the scheme
and hostname are case insensitive and a URL with an explicit ":port",
where the port is the default for the scheme, is equivalent to one
where the port is elided.

7. Security Considerations

A URI does not in itself pose a security threat. Users should beware
that there is no general guarantee that a URL, which at one time
located a given resource, will continue to do so. Nor is there any
guarantee that a URL will not locate a different resource at some
later point in time, due to the lack of any constraint on how a given
authority apportions its namespace. Such a guarantee can only be
obtained from the person(s) controlling that namespace and the
resource in question. A specific URI scheme may include additional
semantics, such as name persistence, if those semantics are required
of all naming authorities for that scheme.

It is sometimes possible to construct a URL such that an attempt to
perform a seemingly harmless, idempotent operation, such as the
retrieval of an entity associated with the resource, will in fact
cause a possibly damaging remote operation to occur. The unsafe URL
is typically constructed by specifying a port number other than that
reserved for the network protocol in question. The client
unwittingly contacts a site that is in fact running a different
protocol. The content of the URL contains instructions that, when
interpreted according to this other protocol, cause an unexpected
operation. An example has been the use of a gopher URL to cause an
unintended or impersonating message to be sent via a SMTP server.

Caution should be used when using any URL that specifies a port
number other than the default for the protocol, especially when it is
a number within the reserved space.

Care should be taken when a URL contains escaped delimiters for a
given protocol (for example, CR and LF characters for telnet
protocols) that these are not unescaped before transmission. This
might violate the protocol, but avoids the potential for such

Berners-Lee, et. al. Standards Track [Page 23]

RFC 2396 URI Generic Syntax August 1998

characters to be used to simulate an extra operation or parameter in
that protocol, which might lead to an unexpected and possibly harmful
remote operation to be performed.

It is clearly unwise to use a URL that contains a password which is
intended to be secret. In particular, the use of a password within
the 'userinfo' component of a URL is strongly disrecommended except
in those rare cases where the 'password' parameter is intended to be

8. Acknowledgements

This document was derived from RFC 1738 [RFC1738] and RFC 1808
[RFC1808]; the acknowledgements in those specifications still apply.
In addition, contributions by Gisle Aas, Martin Beet, Martin Duerst,
Jim Gettys, Martijn Koster, Dave Kristol, Daniel LaLiberte, Foteos
Macrides, James Marshall, Ryan Moats, Keith Moore, and Lauren Wood
are gratefully acknowledged.

9. References

[RFC2277] Alvestrand, H., "IETF Policy on Character Sets and
Languages", BCP 18, RFC 2277, January 1998.

[RFC1630] Berners-Lee, T., "Universal Resource Identifiers in WWW: A
Unifying Syntax for the Expression of Names and Addresses
of Objects on the Network as used in the World-Wide Web",
RFC 1630, June 1994.

[RFC1738] Berners-Lee, T., Masinter, L., and M. McCahill, Editors,
"Uniform Resource Locators (URL)", RFC 1738, December 1994.

[RFC1866] Berners-Lee T., and D. Connolly, "HyperText Markup Language
Specification -- 2.0", RFC 1866, November 1995.

[RFC1123] Braden, R., Editor, "Requirements for Internet Hosts --
Application and Support", STD 3, RFC 1123, October 1989.

[RFC822] Crocker, D., "Standard for the Format of ARPA Internet Text
Messages", STD 11, RFC 822, August 1982.

[RFC1808] Fielding, R., "Relative Uniform Resource Locators", RFC
1808, June 1995.

[RFC2046] Freed, N., and N. Borenstein, "Multipurpose Internet Mail
Extensions (MIME) Part Two: Media Types", RFC 2046,
November 1996.

Berners-Lee, et. al. Standards Track [Page 24]

RFC 2396 URI Generic Syntax August 1998

[RFC1736] Kunze, J., "Functional Recommendations for Internet
Resource Locators", RFC 1736, February 1995.

[RFC2141] Moats, R., "URN Syntax", RFC 2141, May 1997.

[RFC1034] Mockapetris, P., "Domain Names - Concepts and Facilities",
STD 13, RFC 1034, November 1987.

[RFC2110] Palme, J., and A. Hopmann, "MIME E-mail Encapsulation of
Aggregate Documents, such as HTML (MHTML)", RFC 2110, March

[RFC1737] Sollins, K., and L. Masinter, "Functional Requirements for
Uniform Resource Names", RFC 1737, December 1994.

[ASCII] US-ASCII. "Coded Character Set -- 7-bit American Standard
Code for Information Interchange", ANSI X3.4-1986.

[UTF-8] Yergeau, F., "UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO 10646",
RFC 2279, January 1998.

Berners-Lee, et. al. Standards Track [Page 25]

RFC 2396 URI Generic Syntax August 1998

10. Authors' Addresses

Tim Berners-Lee
World Wide Web Consortium
MIT Laboratory for Computer Science, NE43-356
545 Technology Square
Cambridge, MA 02139

Fax: +1(617)258-8682
EMail: timbl@w3.org

Roy T. Fielding
Department of Information and Computer Science
University of California, Irvine
Irvine, CA 92697-3425

Fax: +1(949)824-1715
EMail: fielding@ics.uci.edu

Larry Masinter
Xerox PARC
3333 Coyote Hill Road
Palo Alto, CA 94034

Fax: +1(415)812-4333
EMail: masinter@parc.xerox.com

Berners-Lee, et. al. Standards Track [Page 26]

RFC 2396 URI Generic Syntax August 1998

A. Collected BNF for URI

URI-reference = [ absoluteURI | relativeURI ] [ "#" fragment ]
absoluteURI = scheme ":" ( hier_part | opaque_part )
relativeURI = ( net_path | abs_path | rel_path ) [ "?" query ]

hier_part = ( net_path | abs_path ) [ "?" query ]
opaque_part = uric_no_slash *uric

uric_no_slash = unreserved | escaped | ";" | "?" | ":" | "@" |
"&" | "=" | "+" | "$" | ","

net_path = "//" authority [ abs_path ]
abs_path = "/" path_segments
rel_path = rel_segment [ abs_path ]

rel_segment = 1*( unreserved | escaped |
";" | "@" | "&" | "=" | "+" | "$" | "," )

scheme = alpha *( alpha | digit | "+" | "-" | "." )

authority = server | reg_name

reg_name = 1*( unreserved | escaped | "$" | "," |
";" | ":" | "@" | "&" | "=" | "+" )

server = [ [ userinfo "@" ] hostport ]
userinfo = *( unreserved | escaped |
";" | ":" | "&" | "=" | "+" | "$" | "," )

hostport = host [ ":" port ]
host = hostname | IPv4address
hostname = *( domainlabel "." ) toplabel [ "." ]
domainlabel = alphanum | alphanum *( alphanum | "-" ) alphanum
toplabel = alpha | alpha *( alphanum | "-" ) alphanum
IPv4address = 1*digit "." 1*digit "." 1*digit "." 1*digit
port = *digit

path = [ abs_path | opaque_part ]
path_segments = segment *( "/" segment )
segment = *pchar *( ";" param )
param = *pchar
pchar = unreserved | escaped |
":" | "@" | "&" | "=" | "+" | "$" | ","

query = *uric

fragment = *uric

Berners-Lee, et. al. Standards Track [Page 27]

RFC 2396 URI Generic Syntax August 1998

uric = reserved | unreserved | escaped
reserved = ";" | "/" | "?" | ":" | "@" | "&" | "=" | "+" |
"$" | ","
unreserved = alphanum | mark
mark = "-" | "_" | "." | "!" | "~" | "*" | "'" |
"(" | ")"

escaped = "%" hex hex
hex = digit | "A" | "B" | "C" | "D" | "E" | "F" |
"a" | "b" | "c" | "d" | "e" | "f"

alphanum = alpha | digit
alpha = lowalpha | upalpha

lowalpha = "a" | "b" | "c" | "d" | "e" | "f" | "g" | "h" | "i" |
"j" | "k" | "l" | "m" | "n" | "o" | "p" | "q" | "r" |
"s" | "t" | "u" | "v" | "w" | "x" | "y" | "z"
upalpha = "A" | "B" | "C" | "D" | "E" | "F" | "G" | "H" | "I" |
"J" | "K" | "L" | "M" | "N" | "O" | "P" | "Q" | "R" |
"S" | "T" | "U" | "V" | "W" | "X" | "Y" | "Z"
digit = "0" | "1" | "2" | "3" | "4" | "5" | "6" | "7" |
"8" | "9"

Berners-Lee, et. al. Standards Track [Page 28]

RFC 2396 URI Generic Syntax August 1998

B. Parsing a URI Reference with a Regular Expression

As described in Section 4.3, the generic URI syntax is not sufficient
to disambiguate the components of some forms of URI. Since the
"greedy algorithm" described in that section is identical to the
disambiguation method used by POSIX regular expressions, it is
natural and commonplace to use a regular expression for parsing the
potential four components and fragment identifier of a URI reference.

The following line is the regular expression for breaking-down a URI
reference into its components.

12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

The numbers in the second line above are only to assist readability;
they indicate the reference points for each subexpression (i.e., each
paired parenthesis). We refer to the value matched for subexpression
<n> as $<n>. For example, matching the above expression to


results in the following subexpression matches:

$1 = http:
$2 = http
$3 = //www.ics.uci.edu
$4 = www.ics.uci.edu
$5 = /pub/ietf/uri/
$6 = <undefined>
$7 = <undefined>
$8 = #Related
$9 = Related

where <undefined> indicates that the component is not present, as is
the case for the query component in the above example. Therefore, we
can determine the value of the four components and fragment as

scheme = $2
authority = $4
path = $5
query = $7
fragment = $9

and, going in the opposite direction, we can recreate a URI reference
from its components using the algorithm in step 7 of Section 5.2.

Berners-Lee, et. al. Standards Track [Page 29]

RFC 2396 URI Generic Syntax August 1998

C. Examples of Resolving Relative URI References

Within an object with a well-defined base URI of


the relative URI would be resolved as follows:

C.1. Normal Examples

g:h = g:h
g = http://a/b/c/g
./g = http://a/b/c/g
g/ = http://a/b/c/g/
/g = http://a/g
//g = http://g
?y = http://a/b/c/?y
g?y = http://a/b/c/g?y
#s = (current document)#s
g#s = http://a/b/c/g#s
g?y#s = http://a/b/c/g?y#s
;x = http://a/b/c/;x
g;x = http://a/b/c/g;x
g;x?y#s = http://a/b/c/g;x?y#s
. = http://a/b/c/
./ = http://a/b/c/
.. = http://a/b/
../ = http://a/b/
../g = http://a/b/g
../.. = http://a/
../../ = http://a/
../../g = http://a/g

C.2. Abnormal Examples

Although the following abnormal examples are unlikely to occur in
normal practice, all URI parsers should be capable of resolving them
consistently. Each example uses the same base as above.

An empty reference refers to the start of the current document.

<> = (current document)

Parsers must be careful in handling the case where there are more
relative path ".." segments than there are hierarchical levels in the
base URI's path. Note that the ".." syntax cannot be used to change
the authority component of a URI.

Berners-Lee, et. al. Standards Track [Page 30]

RFC 2396 URI Generic Syntax August 1998

../../../g = http://a/../g
../../../../g = http://a/../../g

In practice, some implementations strip leading relative symbolic
elements (".", "..") after applying a relative URI calculation, based
on the theory that compensating for obvious author errors is better
than allowing the request to fail. Thus, the above two references
will be interpreted as "http://a/g" by some implementations.

Similarly, parsers must avoid treating "." and ".." as special when
they are not complete components of a relative path.

/./g = http://a/./g
/../g = http://a/../g
g. = http://a/b/c/g.
.g = http://a/b/c/.g
g.. = http://a/b/c/g..
..g = http://a/b/c/..g

Less likely are cases where the relative URI uses unnecessary or
nonsensical forms of the "." and ".." complete path segments.

./../g = http://a/b/g
./g/. = http://a/b/c/g/
g/./h = http://a/b/c/g/h
g/../h = http://a/b/c/h
g;x=1/./y = http://a/b/c/g;x=1/y
g;x=1/../y = http://a/b/c/y

All client applications remove the query component from the base URI
before resolving relative URI. However, some applications fail to
separate the reference's query and/or fragment components from a
relative path before merging it with the base path. This error is
rarely noticed, since typical usage of a fragment never includes the
hierarchy ("/") character, and the query component is not normally
used within relative references.

g?y/./x = http://a/b/c/g?y/./x
g?y/../x = http://a/b/c/g?y/../x
g#s/./x = http://a/b/c/g#s/./x
g#s/../x = http://a/b/c/g#s/../x

Berners-Lee, et. al. Standards Track [Page 31]

RFC 2396 URI Generic Syntax August 1998

Some parsers allow the scheme name to be present in a relative URI if
it is the same as the base URI scheme. This is considered to be a
loophole in prior specifications of partial URI [RFC1630]. Its use
should be avoided.

http:g = http:g ; for validating parsers
| http://a/b/c/g ; for backwards compatibility

Berners-Lee, et. al. Standards Track [Page 32]

RFC 2396 URI Generic Syntax August 1998

D. Embedding the Base URI in HTML documents

It is useful to consider an example of how the base URI of a document
can be embedded within the document's content. In this appendix, we
describe how documents written in the Hypertext Markup Language
(HTML) [RFC1866] can include an embedded base URI. This appendix
does not form a part of the URI specification and should not be
considered as anything more than a descriptive example.

HTML defines a special element "BASE" which, when present in the
"HEAD" portion of a document, signals that the parser should use the
BASE element's "HREF" attribute as the base URI for resolving any
relative URI. The "HREF" attribute must be an absolute URI. Note
that, in HTML, element and attribute names are case-insensitive. For

<!doctype html public "-//IETF//DTD HTML//EN">
<TITLE>An example HTML document</TITLE>
<BASE href="http://www.ics.uci.edu/Test/a/b/c">
... <A href="../x">a hypertext anchor</A> ...

A parser reading the example document should interpret the given
relative URI "../x" as representing the absolute URI


regardless of the context in which the example document was obtained.

Berners-Lee, et. al. Standards Track [Page 33]

RFC 2396 URI Generic Syntax August 1998

E. Recommendations for Delimiting URI in Context

URI are often transmitted through formats that do not provide a clear
context for their interpretation. For example, there are many
occasions when URI are included in plain text; examples include text
sent in electronic mail, USENET news messages, and, most importantly,
printed on paper. In such cases, it is important to be able to
delimit the URI from the rest of the text, and in particular from
punctuation marks that might be mistaken for part of the URI.

In practice, URI are delimited in a variety of ways, but usually
within double-quotes "http://test.com/", angle brackets
<http://test.com/>, or just using whitespace


These wrappers do not form part of the URI.

In the case where a fragment identifier is associated with a URI
reference, the fragment would be placed within the brackets as well
(separated from the URI with a "#" character).

In some cases, extra whitespace (spaces, linebreaks, tabs, etc.) may
need to be added to break long URI across lines. The whitespace
should be ignored when extracting the URI.

No whitespace should be introduced after a hyphen ("-") character.
Because some typesetters and printers may (erroneously) introduce a
hyphen at the end of line when breaking a line, the interpreter of a
URI containing a line break immediately after a hyphen should ignore
all unescaped whitespace around the line break, and should be aware
that the hyphen may or may not actually be part of the URI.

Using <> angle brackets around each URI is especially recommended as
a delimiting style for URI that contain whitespace.

The prefix "URL:" (with or without a trailing space) was recommended
as a way to used to help distinguish a URL from other bracketed
designators, although this is not common in practice.

For robustness, software that accepts user-typed URI should attempt
to recognize and strip both delimiters and embedded whitespace.

For example, the text:

Berners-Lee, et. al. Standards Track [Page 34]

RFC 2396 URI Generic Syntax August 1998

Yes, Jim, I found it under "http://www.w3.org/Addressing/",
but you can probably pick it up from <ftp://ds.internic.
net/rfc/>. Note the warning in <http://www.ics.uci.edu/pub/

contains the URI references


Berners-Lee, et. al. Standards Track [Page 35]

RFC 2396 URI Generic Syntax August 1998

F. Abbreviated URLs

The URL syntax was designed for unambiguous reference to network
resources and extensibility via the URL scheme. However, as URL
identification and usage have become commonplace, traditional media
(television, radio, newspapers, billboards, etc.) have increasingly
used abbreviated URL references. That is, a reference consisting of
only the authority and path portions of the identified resource, such


or simply the DNS hostname on its own. Such references are primarily
intended for human interpretation rather than machine, with the
assumption that context-based heuristics are sufficient to complete
the URL (e.g., most hostnames beginning with "www" are likely to have
a URL prefix of "http://"). Although there is no standard set of
heuristics for disambiguating abbreviated URL references, many client
implementations allow them to be entered by the user and
heuristically resolved. It should be noted that such heuristics may
change over time, particularly when new URL schemes are introduced.

Since an abbreviated URL has the same syntax as a relative URL path,
abbreviated URL references cannot be used in contexts where relative
URLs are expected. This limits the use of abbreviated URLs to places
where there is no defined base URL, such as dialog boxes and off-line

Berners-Lee, et. al. Standards Track [Page 36]

RFC 2396 URI Generic Syntax August 1998

G. Summary of Non-editorial Changes

G.1. Additions

Section 4 (URI References) was added to stem the confusion regarding
"what is a URI" and how to describe fragment identifiers given that
they are not part of the URI, but are part of the URI syntax and
parsing concerns. In addition, it provides a reference definition
for use by other IETF specifications (HTML, HTTP, etc.) that have
previously attempted to redefine the URI syntax in order to account
for the presence of fragment identifiers in URI references.

Section 2.4 was rewritten to clarify a number of misinterpretations
and to leave room for fully internationalized URI.

Appendix F on abbreviated URLs was added to describe the shortened
references often seen on television and magazine advertisements and
explain why they are not used in other contexts.

G.2. Modifications from both RFC 1738 and RFC 1808

Changed to URI syntax instead of just URL.

Confusion regarding the terms "character encoding", the URI
"character set", and the escaping of characters with %<hex><hex>
equivalents has (hopefully) been reduced. Many of the BNF rule names
regarding the character sets have been changed to more accurately
describe their purpose and to encompass all "characters" rather than
just US-ASCII octets. Unless otherwise noted here, these
modifications do not affect the URI syntax.

Both RFC 1738 and RFC 1808 refer to the "reserved" set of characters
as if URI-interpreting software were limited to a single set of
characters with a reserved purpose (i.e., as meaning something other
than the data to which the characters correspond), and that this set
was fixed by the URI scheme. However, this has not been true in
practice; any character that is interpreted differently when it is
escaped is, in effect, reserved. Furthermore, the interpreting
engine on a HTTP server is often dependent on the resource, not just
the URI scheme. The description of reserved characters has been
changed accordingly.

The plus "+", dollar "$", and comma "," characters have been added to
those in the "reserved" set, since they are treated as reserved
within the query component.

Berners-Lee, et. al. Standards Track [Page 37]

RFC 2396 URI Generic Syntax August 1998

The tilde "~" character was added to those in the "unreserved" set,
since it is extensively used on the Internet in spite of the
difficulty to transcribe it with some keyboards.

The syntax for URI scheme has been changed to require that all
schemes begin with an alpha character.

The "user:password" form in the previous BNF was changed to a
"userinfo" token, and the possibility that it might be
"user:password" made scheme specific. In particular, the use of
passwords in the clear is not even suggested by the syntax.

The question-mark "?" character was removed from the set of allowed
characters for the userinfo in the authority component, since testing
showed that many applications treat it as reserved for separating the
query component from the rest of the URI.

The semicolon ";" character was added to those stated as being
reserved within the authority component, since several new schemes
are using it as a separator within userinfo to indicate the type of
user authentication.

RFC 1738 specified that the path was separated from the authority
portion of a URI by a slash. RFC 1808 followed suit, but with a
fudge of carrying around the separator as a "prefix" in order to
describe the parsing algorithm. RFC 1630 never had this problem,
since it considered the slash to be part of the path. In writing
this specification, it was found to be impossible to accurately
describe and retain the difference between the two URI
<foo:/bar> and <foo:bar>
without either considering the slash to be part of the path (as
corresponds to actual practice) or creating a separate component just
to hold that slash. We chose the former.

G.3. Modifications from RFC 1738

The definition of specific URL schemes and their scheme-specific
syntax and semantics has been moved to separate documents.

The URL host was defined as a fully-qualified domain name. However,
many URLs are used without fully-qualified domain names (in contexts
for which the full qualification is not necessary), without any host
(as in some file URLs), or with a host of "localhost".

The URL port is now *digit instead of 1*digit, since systems are
expected to handle the case where the ":" separator between host and
port is supplied without a port.

Berners-Lee, et. al. Standards Track [Page 38]

RFC 2396 URI Generic Syntax August 1998

The recommendations for delimiting URI in context (Appendix E) have
been adjusted to reflect current practice.

G.4. Modifications from RFC 1808

RFC 1808 (Section 4) defined an empty URL reference (a reference
containing nothing aside from the fragment identifier) as being a
reference to the base URL. Unfortunately, that definition could be
interpreted, upon selection of such a reference, as a new retrieval
action on that resource. Since the normal intent of such references
is for the user agent to change its view of the current document to
the beginning of the specified fragment within that document, not to
make an additional request of the resource, a description of how to
correctly interpret an empty reference has been added in Section 4.

The description of the mythical Base header field has been replaced
with a reference to the Content-Location header field defined by
MHTML [RFC2110].

RFC 1808 described various schemes as either having or not having the
properties of the generic URI syntax. However, the only requirement
is that the particular document containing the relative references
have a base URI that abides by the generic URI syntax, regardless of
the URI scheme, so the associated description has been updated to
reflect that.

The BNF term <net_loc> has been replaced with <authority>, since the
latter more accurately describes its use and purpose. Likewise, the
authority is no longer restricted to the IP server syntax.

Extensive testing of current client applications demonstrated that
the majority of deployed systems do not use the ";" character to
indicate trailing parameter information, and that the presence of a
semicolon in a path segment does not affect the relative parsing of
that segment. Therefore, parameters have been removed as a separate
component and may now appear in any path segment. Their influence
has been removed from the algorithm for resolving a relative URI
reference. The resolution examples in Appendix C have been modified
to reflect this change.

Implementations are now allowed to work around misformed relative
references that are prefixed by the same scheme as the base URI, but
only for schemes known to use the <hier_part> syntax.

Berners-Lee, et. al. Standards Track [Page 39]

RFC 2396 URI Generic Syntax August 1998

H. Full Copyright Statement

Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1998). All Rights Reserved.

This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than

The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.

This document and the information contained herein is provided on an

Berners-Lee, et. al. Standards Track [Page 40]