"David H. Lipman" <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote in message
news:j17eem015fp@news6.newsguy.com...
> From: "FromTheRafters" <erratic.howard@gmail.com>
>
>> "David H. Lipman" <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote in message
>> news:j173ll0tfr@news6.newsguy.com...
>>> From: "FromTheRafters" <erratic.howard@gmail.com>
>>>
>>>>>> Isn't it still a URL even if you use the numerical address
>>>>>> instead of a name to look up? )
>>>>>
>>>>> Nope. URL is a name, IP is an.. You guessed it, IP! URL requires DNS
>>>>> help, actual IP doesn't.
>>>>
>>>> This time, I'll have to agree with Wikipedia:
>>>>
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Resource_Locator
>>>> "Every URL consists of some of the following: the scheme name (commonly
>>>> called protocol), followed by a colon, then, depending on scheme, a domain
>>>> name (alternatively, IP address), a port number, the path of the resource
>>>> to be fetched or the program to be run, then, for programs such as Common
>>>> Gateway Interface (CGI) scripts, a query string,[8][9] and an optional
>>>> fragment identifier.[10]
>>>>
>>>> The syntax is
>>>> scheme://domainort/path?query_string#fragment_id"
>>>>
>>>> They are in total agreement with what I had already understood to be the
>>>> case, so I like their answer better than yours. It is *still* a URL whether
>>>> a domain name (or other name) to IP address lookup is needed or not.
>>>>
>>> When does a URL become an IRL ?
>>>
>>> Local protocols like hcp ?
>>> Ex: hcp://system/HomePage.htm
>>
>> I don't know, maybe when localhost (127.0.0.1) is assumed by the protocol?
>>
>> I refer to RFC 1738 now:
>>
>> "host
>> The fully qualified domain name of a network host, or its IP
>> address as a set of four decimal digit groups separated by
>> ".". Fully qualified domain names take the form as described
>> in Section 3.5 of RFC 1034 [13] and Section 2.1 of RFC 1123
>> [5]: ..."
>>
>>> BTW: That syntax is incomplete:
>>> scheme://userassword@hostort/path
>>
>> Yes, this is in agreement with rfc 1738 and the "host" section excerpted
>> above.
>
> I think I have it.
>
> A URL is all forms such as hcp://xxxxx That why it it is a Universal
> Resource. Its the overarching concept.
> A IRL is a subset limited to network protocols. That why it it is a Internet
> Resource.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Resource_Locator

Thanks for the link, but as is often the case I find the rfc to be better
written than the Wiki article.

My take on it is that both URL and IRL are both restrictions of the overarching
Resource Locator concept. They both seem to be designed for the "Internet"
as opposed to the more general locator. I'll have to read further to assess what
any differences might be. I'm guessing at this point that the differences are in
the syntactical requirements' further restrictions in the URL.