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

Re: XRI vote aftermath

From: Peter Davis <peter.davis@neustar.biz>
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2008 16:37:05 -0400
Message-Id: <409936BD-4417-47B8-9F2B-94D41FD74A09@neustar.biz>
To: David Booth <dbooth@hp.com>, Marty Schleiff <marty.schleiff@boeing.com>, "www-tag@w3.org WG" <www-tag@w3.org>


I read through your reasoning on anyURI to HTTP transforms [1], with  
the supposition that one should be able to construct this argument,  
not only for potential new URI schemes, but for existing ones as  
well.  However, i could not manage to follow how your reasoning would  
apply to URI schemes such as tel: .

Given that the authority-part construction of the URI is:

	a] open to resolution policies outside the control of a userAgent
	b] given a fully-qualified E.164 number, what utility would I gain  
by making such a transform. a tel: URI carries all that is required  
for my client (and it's surrounding network) to function properly for  
the end user.

this would seem to be a candidate scheme which falls outside of your  
reasoning, would it not?


[1] http://dbooth.org/2006/urn2http/

On Jun 6, 2008, at 3:21 PM, Drummond Reed wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-tag-request@w3.org [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org] On  
> Behalf Of
> Booth, David (HP Software - Boston)
> Sent: Friday, June 06, 2008 7:51 AM
> To: Schleiff, Marty; www-tag@w3.org
> Subject: RE: XRI vote Aftermath
>> From: Schleiff, Marty
>> [ . . . ]
>> In the coming weeks I hope to document some use cases that  
>> demonstrate
>> clear utility for XRI beyond that available with already
>> registered URI schemes.
> Please take a look at "Converting New URI Schemes or URN Sub- 
> Schemes to
> http://dbooth.org/2006/urn2http/
> Though not a formal proof, it represents an informal proof-by- 
> construction
> that the capabilities of HTTP URIs are virtually a direct superset  
> of those
> of URIs based on new URI schemes or URN sub-schemes.  The abstract:
> [[
> New URI schemes or URN sub-schemes are sometimes proposed for resource
> identification in applications where the HTTP protocol is deemed  
> unsuitable.
> This paper argues that URIs based on specialized HTTP URI prefixes  
> would be
> a better choice in virtually all cases, even if the resource  
> resolution or
> data transfer properties of HTTP are insufficient for these  
> applications.
> A simple recipe is presented for converting proposed URI schemes or  
> sub-schemes to HTTP using specialized URI prefixes.  This technique  
> cleanly
> separates the use of the URI as an identifier (to establish resource
> identity) from the use of the URI as a locator (to retrieve
> representations).  The resulting capabilities of the HTTP URIs are  
> virtually
> a direct superset of those of URIs based on new URI schemes or URN
> sub-schemes.
> ]]
Received on Monday, 9 June 2008 20:38:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:32:57 UTC