Re: BOF Request for URIREV04

From: "Larry Masinter" <LMM@acm.org>
> > Could you clarify the meaning of "problematic" -- for whom: the
> > registrants experiencing the IETF's processes, or the IETF,
> > the W3C, or a combination of those? Will 'tag' be included?
>
> My goal was to have an open discussion about why some
> schemes seemed to be controversial or difficult,
> and what the nature of the problems might be. I would
> hope to avoid any significant discussion of any individual
> scheme, except perhaps as an example.

Without discussing specific schemes in detail, could you at least list those
that are "problematic"?  I assume that if "problematic schemes" are on the
agenda then someone must be able to list them. It would even be better if
there could be a short summary of the problem for each!

And more generally, I think I speak for a number of people in suggesting
that it would be very helpful to have some "official" list of
pending/proposed uri schemes (with a status for each), just as there is a
current "Official IANA Registry of URI Schemes" at
http://www.iana.org/assignments/uri-schemes.

I won't be at the meeting nor will any of my colleagues as far as I know,
but perhaps you could discuss this?

Thanks.  --Ray

Received on Friday, 23 July 2004 17:02:32 UTC