W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > March 2006

on the dix: URI scheme for DIX/SXIP

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 16:29:55 -0500
Message-Id: <f9a330c34131f852d33af85d0862a15e@w3.org>
Cc: uri@w3.org, Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>, dix@ietf.org
To: John Merrells <merrells@sxip.com>, Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>

I learned at a W3C authorization workshop this week
   http://www.w3.org/2005/Security/usability-ws/program
that there's a SXIP/DIX BOF at the IETF next week.
   http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/06mar/agenda/dix.html

I'm pretty excited about DIX/SXIP and related web-like authorization 
mechanisms,
but I don't think I can swing the trip to Dallas.

Section 7 of http://dixs.org/index.php/Draft-merrells-dix-01.txt
says "This document has no IANA Actions." but section 3.2.6. DIX URI 
Namespace
introduces a new URI scheme.

Introducing a new URI scheme just for DIX is not a good use of scarce 
community resources;
let's not do the DAV: thing again.

Instead of
   dix:/homesite
just use something like
   http://dixs.org/terms#homesite

There are some IANA considerations around dixs.org; IANA should
make sure that name is reserved for this purpose in perpetuity if this
spec is adopted. Or the DIX profile should use iana.org or ietf.org .
(There's a BCP that says to use urn:ietf , but I recommend against that;
I intend to renew the internet draft that argues for http/dns rather
than urn:ietf: .)

The draft charter also doesn't say that DIX is introducing a new URI 
scheme.
   http://dixs.org/index.php/DIX_Charter
Please add something to the charter about getting review for the dix: 
scheme.

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Friday, 17 March 2006 21:30:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 13 January 2011 12:15:36 GMT