W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-uri-cg@w3.org > October 2003

RE: DOI and the non-IETF tree

From: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 10:59:55 -0700
To: "'Dan Connolly'" <connolly@w3.org>
Cc: public-uri-cg@w3.org
Message-id: <000601c37a20$d68728b0$6501a8c0@MasinterT40>

> "Authors of specifications SHOULD avoid introducing new URI  schemes
> existing schemes can be used to meet the goals of the specifications."
>  --
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-webarch-20030627/#pr-new-scheme-expensive
> "To help parties know when they are referring to the same resource, it
> follows that URI producers should be conservative about the number of
> different URIs they produce for the same resource."
>  --
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-webarch-20030627/#identifiers-comparison

Since people with URI scheme proposals who want 'official' endorsement
will look to the IETF and not necessarily to the 'Web Architecture'
document, should there be a joint IETF/W3C activity to update the
URI registration BCP and guidelines documents to include this new

Update 2718?
Received on Friday, 3 October 2003 02:14:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:38:47 UTC