- From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2008 16:30:41 -0500
- To: "Mike Schinkel" <mikeschinkel@gmail.com>
- Cc: "'Erik Wilde'" <dret@berkeley.edu>, uri@w3.org
Mike Schinkel writes: > Since you believe so strongly in having a geoloc: scheme, why > not create an implementation that requires it and attempt to > see it become widely deployed/utilized? I have very mixed feelings about this. In general, putting trial technology out there and letting the market decide is a good thing, but I'm not sure there are good ways to experimentally "squat" on parts of URI space. If Erik starts using geocode: then (a) I would think he should register it and (b) that would mean that for all time nobody else could use it either for an entirely different purpose or, more likely, for geographic codes implemented in a different way. My intuition would be to not deploy a new URI scheme unless you, and preferably a significant fraction of the affected community, agrees that it's a good long term investment. Just my opinion, and it may well be that there are conventions for experimenting with schemes and that I am unaware of them. Also: the fact that something like a geocode scheme starts to get widespread adoption doesn't entirely settle the question of whether it was the right architecture for the greater good. It's quite possible that it's conveniently meeting the short term needs of early users, while sacrificing potentially important long term benefits such as integration with the browsable Web, etc. Noah -------------------------------------- Noah Mendelsohn IBM Corporation One Rogers Street Cambridge, MA 02142 1-617-693-4036 --------------------------------------
Received on Thursday, 3 January 2008 21:30:11 UTC