Scheme Section 2 quibble

[Sean Conner]

It was thus said that the Great Remco once stated:
> 2020/11/18 16:46, Philip Linde:
> 
> >> "gemini://$host"
> >>     31 -> 57.6% (!!)
> >>     20 -> 34%
> >>     30 -> 1.6%
> >>
> >> "gemini://$host/"
> >>     20 -> 93%
> >
> > This is alarming IMO. I have expressed it before in the mailing list,
> > but because of the normalization rules of RFC 3986, an empty path is
> > *equivalent* to the path "/". Serving a 3x redirect on one and a page on
> > the other is wrong.
> >
> > In this case it's likely rather benign that they serve different
> > content, because I assume that a client will arrive at the same resource
> > after following a redirect, but it has to be understood that a client
> > might make these generalizations as well, in which case that client
> > can't access the resource that's served when requesting an empty path.
> >
> > It would be interesting to figure out which server software is the
> > culprit.
> 
> If you want to point fingers:
> 
>   https://github.com/michael-lazar/gemini-diagnostics/blob/master/gemini-diagnostics#L440
> 
> That's what I based my implementation on and I suspect many others did
> so too.

  The test isn't *wrong* per se, it's just testing at the wrong level.  My
server will return:

	gemini://gemini.conman.org	-> 20
	gemini://gemini.conman.org/	-> 20

but

	gemini://gemini.conman.org/test	-> 31 gemini://gemini.conman.org/test/

  which is what that test is testing.  

  -spc