W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-core@w3.org > July to September 2005

Re: Comments on "Guidelines and Registration Procedures for new URI Schemes"

From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 19:08:52 -0700
Message-Id: <92ba04e8bed0b01ad37c913778b32ff2@gbiv.com>
Cc: hardie@qualcomm.com, iesg@ietf.org, tony+urireg@maillennium.att.com, uri@w3.org, LMM@acm.org, "public-i18n-core@w3.org" <public-i18n-core@w3.org>
To: "Felix Sasaki" <fsasaki@w3.org>

On Aug 31, 2005, at 8:09 AM, Felix Sasaki wrote:

> Comments:
>
> [1] The passage "In particular, the mapping should describe the 
> mechanisms for encoding binary or character strings within valid 
> character sequences in a URI.". There is already a mapping mechanism 
> in rfc 3987, sec. 3.1. It should be made sure in your document that 
> the mechanism you are describing is compatible with the rfc 3987 
> mechanism. One reason for this is the role of UTF-8, which is handled 
> in the mechanism of rfc 3987.

Felix, all of your comments are requesting that the document defining
the URI scheme registry should have dependencies on the IRI RFC.
That is neither appropriate nor necessary, since IRI already defines
the mapping from URI to IRI in 3987. RFC 3987 is not at the same
level of standardization as URIs: it is a new technology that is
defined as a mapping from URIs, not something that determines the
requirements for URIs.  Introducing dependencies on new technology
RFCs is unwise given that the actual requirements for URI schemes
are already defined in a full standard.


Cheers,

Roy T. Fielding                            <http://roy.gbiv.com/>
Chief Scientist, Day Software              <http://www.day.com/>
Received on Thursday, 1 September 2005 02:09:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 1 October 2008 10:18:49 GMT