W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > January 2012

Re: HTML5 proposes introduction of new family of URI schemes

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 15:36:00 +0100
Message-ID: <4F182A50.7030501@gmx.de>
To: Christopher B Ferris <chrisfer@us.ibm.com>
CC: "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>, Jonathan A Rees <rees@mumble.net>, "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
On 2012-01-19 15:26, Christopher B Ferris wrote:
> Martin,
> I still do not understand, from your explanations, what value the 'web+'
> prefix brings to the table over the status quo.
> I get that it would be bad for a malicious web service to try to trick
> the user into associating all http traffic with it. However,
> 'web+' doesn't really fix that, instead it creates more problems that it
> intends to solve.
> The authors of a protocol are likely not the same individuals who might
> conceive of the idea of a web-based handler. Seems as if the scheme will
> simply encourage
> all protocol designers to register their URI scheme with the 'web+'
> prefix simply to leave open the prospect of a web-based handler. This
> defeats the intended
> purpose of the 'web+' prefix.
> Further, I notice the whitelist omits xmpp. Is there no hope for
> web-based IM, absent a formal change in the spec? Someone better alert
> Meebo.
> ...

xmpp missing from the whitelist sounds like a bug to me. Please raise a 
bugzilla issue: 

Best regards, Julian
Received on Thursday, 19 January 2012 14:36:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:33:13 UTC