-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 / MDaconta@aol.com was heard to say: [...] | But handed a URI with either a known URI scheme (like <A HREF="mailto:)">mailto:)</A> or | from a known organization (based on a domain name), It is appropriate to | peek into the URL according to either the standards of the scheme or | standards | of the sending organization. I think the best you could say is that it "may" be appropriate. Sometimes. For some agents. I don't know of any places that provide such guarantees on a domain-wide basis. | IMO, both areas of further URI standardization (scheme, domain) should be | encouraged. And I'm inclined to say it should be discouraged. It isn't interoperable, and significantly it won't scale (pick two or three bits of metadata and you can probably devise a scheme that'll work. Now pick two or three thousand bits...). It adds complexity where it can be removed. Be seeing you, norm - -- Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM | A life, admirable at first sight, may have XML Standards Architect | cost so much in imposed liabilities, chores Web Tech. and Standards | and self-abasement, that, brilliant though it Sun Microsystems, Inc. | appears, it cannot be considered other than a | failure. Another, which seems to have | misfired, is in reality a triumphant success, | because it has cost so little.--Henry De | Montherlant -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.7 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/> iD8DBQE/DcVrOyltUcwYWjsRAjUIAKCAspe9napG3ZFQHSsBz1kmaw3j4gCcDSbN bMMsPCPZsFqQIDAl5yCS69I= =dl70 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----Received on Thursday, 10 July 2003 15:59:01 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:55:48 GMT