W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2008

Re: Opting in to cookies - proposal

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2008 16:54:30 +0200
To: "Maciej Stachowiak" <mjs@apple.com>, "Jonas Sicking" <jonas@sicking.cc>
Cc: public-webapps@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.ucujo40y64w2qv@annevk-t60.oslo.opera.com>

On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 10:38:44 +0200, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>  
wrote:
> The downsides of inventing a URI scheme include:
>
> 1) URIs using this scheme will not parse into components properly (the  
> feed: scheme has this problem)
> 2) The scheme really should be registered through IANA, which will be a  
> bureaucratic hassle
> 3) IANA would probably be hesitant, because user-private: does not  
> describe a new resource access method, it just describes what headers  
> you want to send, which in http is separate from the URI
> 4) It is in fact a valid point that this violates the design of URI  
> schemes
> 5) Code throughout the system will have to know to special-case this URI  
> scheme to treat it as equivalent to the corresponding HTTP URI

I strongly agree that if we do this at all we should not do it through a  
new URI scheme. If we do this something like Hixie's original proposal  
makes more sense to me (and maybe allowing it to be influenced by a flag):

   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-appformats/2008May/0007.html


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Monday, 16 June 2008 14:54:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:25 GMT