W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2009

Re: File API commens

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2009 18:53:32 +0200
Message-ID: <4ACE190C.5060704@gmx.de>
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
CC: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>, public-webapps@w3.org, arun@mozilla.com
Jonas Sicking wrote:
> ...
> I think we'd really like to avoid creating a new scheme if we could
> reuse an existing one. I know Arun was looking for an existing scheme,
> but not sure if he looked at the 'urn' scheme.
> Would it need to be urn:somename:uuid though? like urn:fileid:uuid?
> ...

What's wrong with urn:uuid, which is defined in RFC 4122 and already cited?

> Also, Anne pointed out that we probably want fragment identifiers to
> work in whatever URI is returned. Would that be possible if we use
> 'urn'? If I'm reading rfc2141 right, it seems to say it's undefined.

Fragment identifiers are independent of the URI scheme 

BR, Julian
Received on Thursday, 8 October 2009 16:54:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 27 October 2017 07:26:20 UTC