W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > March 2002

Re: Re[2]: cost of new/private URI schemes well known? [was: section 1, intro, for review]

From: Steven Livingstone <s.livingstone@btinternet.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 07:47:28 -0000
Message-ID: <00c401c1cfe3$7cf680e0$8119fea9@bobo>
To: "Chris Lilley" <chris@w3.org>
Cc: <www-tag@w3.org>
I agree namespaces everywhere isn't artistic in any way, but from the
discussions, particularly even the simple "about" example, clearly some
uniqeuness is needed - i'm open to sugestions :)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Lilley" <chris@w3.org>
To: "Steven Livingstone" <s.livingstone@btinternet.com>
Cc: <www-tag@w3.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 1:48 AM
Subject: Re[2]: cost of new/private URI schemes well known? [was: section 1,
intro, for review]


> On Tuesday, 19 March, 2002, 23:33:58, Steven wrote:
>
>
> SL> Why not say something is WebTV specific in a standard way that is
> SL> still unique?
>
> SL> I have some ideas on how this could be done - ie.
"domain.com/myID:uri" is
> SL> not much diferent from "about:blah", but we could at least identify
> SL> "microsoft.com:about" from "netscape:about"....
>
> SL> Only thoughts, but as i'm working on my own
"deltabis.com/auth:steven_L"
> SL> ideas then maybe skewed.
>
>
> Woohoo, namespaces for URI schemes, and namespaces themselves use URIs,
> and fragment identifiers may use namespaces with thus use URIS. All of
> that should soon make something that won't fit on the side of a bus,
> or a movie trailer....
>
> --
>  Chris                            mailto:chris@w3.org
>
Received on Wednesday, 20 March 2002 02:47:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:05 GMT