- From: Chris Weber <chris@lookout.net>
- Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2012 22:55:27 -0800
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- CC: "PUBLIC-IRI@W3.ORG" <PUBLIC-IRI@w3.org>
On 1/14/2012 5:16 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > I'm in the process of writing a Change Proposal asking for a removal > of this feature. In the meantime, it would be useful if the WG came up > with "official" feedback on overloading the scheme name. > <hat type="individual" /> Is this the first example of a scheme prefix like "web+" overloading the scheme name? I'm not clear on the history, use cases, and the impetus behind "web+". Generally speaking, it seems that a great deal of care has been put into the registration process for scheme names, and that the "web+" prefix sidesteps all of that, albeit limited to the prefix. Surely there's good reason for due diligence in the scheme registration process, right? And speaking as someone who does a lot of Web application penetration testing, one of my first thoughts when I saw this, with eyebrows raised really high, was 'let the fun begin'... Best regards, Chris Weber
Received on Monday, 16 January 2012 06:56:32 UTC