W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > May 2000

Re: Submit TV-URI work to IESG ? (was: Re: "lid" URLs)

From: by way of <ph@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 09 May 2000 00:37:49 +0900
Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.J.20000509003739.03093700@sh.w3.mag.keio.ac.jp>
To: uri@w3.org
In the meantime, I just out that the tv: URI document is currently
in the RFC editor queue
http://www.rfc-editor.org/queue.html

It should be issued as an informational/experimental RFC soon.

Philipp Hoschka a 馗rit :
 >
 > Dan,
 >
 > this may be an issue: I can't find the draft on the list of
 > things the IESG is currently working on
 > http://www.ietf.org/IESG/status.html
 >
 > You may want to go back and check that things didn't get lost
 > somewhere.
 >
 > -Philipp
 >
 > Dan Zigmond a 馗rit :
 > >
 > > Philipp,
 > >
 > > Yes, I did forward the current "tv:" spec to the IESG shortly after my 
last
 > > posting.  So they are working on it.
 > >
 > > If we have some consensus around "lid:" as well, I'll certainly 
forward that
 > > too.
 > >
 > >         Dan
 > >
 > > ---------------------------------------------------
 > > Dan Zigmond
 > > Senior Group Manager, Client Technologies
 > > WebTV Networks, Inc.
 > > djz@corp.webtv.net
 > > ---------------------------------------------------
 > >
 > > -----Original Message-----
 > > From: Philipp Hoschka [mailto:ph@w3.org]
 > > Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2000 9:07 PM
 > > To: Dan Zigmond
 > > Cc: 'Larry Masinter'; uri@w3.org; www-tv@w3.org
 > > Subject: Submit TV-URI work to IESG ? (was: Re: "lid" URLs)
 > >
 > > Dan,
 > >
 > > i think that at least the "tv:" scheme seems to be ready to be
 > > forwarded to the IESG for adoption - what do you think ? There
 > > was not much discussion last time you did an update, so maybe it's
 > > time to wrap this up.
 > >
 > > -Philipp
 > >
 > > Dan Zigmond a 馗rit :
 > > >
 > > > Agreed.  We were a little careless in our terminology (as others also
 > > > pointed out), and I just haven't gotten around to revising the drafts.
 > > >
 > > >         Dan
 > > >
 > > > ---------------------------------------------------
 > > > Dan Zigmond
 > > > Senior Group Manager, Client Technologies
 > > > WebTV Networks, Inc.
 > > > djz@corp.webtv.net
 > > > ---------------------------------------------------
 > > >
 > > > -----Original Message-----
 > > > From: Larry Masinter [mailto:LM@att.com]
 > > > Sent: Saturday, April 15, 2000 10:33 AM
 > > > To: uri@w3.org; www-tv@w3.org
 > > > Subject: "lid" URLs
 > > >
 > > > (someone) wrote me:
 > > >
 > > > > I've just noticed a couple of Internet drafts that propose and 
refer to
 > > a
 > > > > URI scheme called lid:
 > > > >
 > > > >    draft-blackketter-lid-00.txt
 > > > >    draft-finseth-isanlid-00.txt
 > > > >
 > > > > I have two thoughts:
 > > > >
 > > > > (a) these lid:'s look more like URNs to me
 > > > >
 > > > > (b) the lid draft claims that lid:'s are simulatneously URIs and URNs,
 > > but
 > > > > they don't conform to URN syntax (in not having a leading "urn:" or
 > > > > namespace identifier parts).
 > > >
 > > > I don't have a problem with URL-schemes that have URN-like semantics,
 > > > since there are enough of them already (cid, news, etc.). I think the
 > > > wording (saying that lid URLs are URNs) probably needs to change, since
 > > > it just adds confusion.
 > > >
 > > > Larry
Received on Monday, 8 May 2000 14:05:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 13 January 2011 12:15:27 GMT