W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > June 2008

XRI vote aftermath

From: Schleiff, Marty <marty.schleiff@boeing.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 08:35:45 -0700
Message-ID: <2C1C6A07EEDCB14ABBACAC793BF8BE9E0761D17E@XCH-NW-6V2.nw.nos.boeing.com>
To: <www-tag@w3.org>

I still have hopes for XRI, and will try to work towards concensus as
encouraged by my Boeing colleagues who participate in W3C. Perhaps if
you can help me better understand the TAG's objection to XRI, I'll be
better able to figure out how to proceed, perhaps with better use cases,
perhaps with modifications to the XRI specs, etc. 

I'll start by asking for help to understand the TAG's stance on
introduction of new URI schemes. I understand the part about it being
costly to introduce new schemes. What I wonder about is the idea that
the http: scheme should be used for everything (I probably didn't state
that very well - perhaps you can put it into better words).

If there existed no mailto:, or ldap:, or https: scheme today (the three
I'm most familiar with beyond http:), what would be the TAG's reaction
to a request for a new scheme for mailto: or ldap: or https?

Thanks,

Marty.Schleiff@boeing.com; CISSP
Associate Technical Fellow - Cyber Identity Specialist
Information Security - Technical Controls
(206) 679-5933
Received on Monday, 2 June 2008 15:36:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:57 GMT