W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-iri@w3.org > May 2012

Re: [Uri-review] In WG last call review of URI Schemes rtsp, rtsps and rtspu

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2012 18:16:53 +0200
Message-ID: <4FA15DF5.8060807@gmx.de>
To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
CC: "public-iri@w3.org" <public-iri@w3.org>, Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
On 2012-05-02 18:00, Larry Masinter wrote:
> Note on IRI working group document 4395bis:
> I wonder if we should explicitly disallow documents that define new schemes from defining fragment identifier syntax within the scheme-specific syntax listed or referred to, in the scheme registration template.
> See
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc2326bis-29#section-22.14.1
> ...

It appears that the document tries to do the right thing, but is 
confused about whether it even needs to mention fragment identifiers.

Maybe the registration document should offer guidelines on how to handle 
this properly (if it doesn't already)?

Such as: "just define the ABNF for the scheme-specific part (RFC 3986, 
Section 3, hier-part production)"?

Best regards, Julian
Received on Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:17:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:39:44 UTC