Next message: Jerding, Dean: "tv:"
Message-ID: <38FD30D8.DB44CF7F@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 12:06:48 +0800
From: Philipp Hoschka <ph@w3.org>
To: Dan Zigmond <djz@corp.webtv.net>
CC: "'Larry Masinter'" <LM@att.com>, uri@w3.org, www-tv@w3.org
Subject: Submit TV-URI work to IESG ? (was: Re: "lid" URLs)
Dan,
i think that at least the "tv:" scheme seems to be ready to be
forwarded to the IESG for adoption - what do you think ? There
was not much discussion last time you did an update, so maybe it's
time to wrap this up.
-Philipp
Dan Zigmond a écrit :
>
> Agreed. We were a little careless in our terminology (as others also
> pointed out), and I just haven't gotten around to revising the drafts.
>
> Dan
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> Dan Zigmond
> Senior Group Manager, Client Technologies
> WebTV Networks, Inc.
> djz@corp.webtv.net
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Larry Masinter [mailto:LM@att.com]
> Sent: Saturday, April 15, 2000 10:33 AM
> To: uri@w3.org; www-tv@w3.org
> Subject: "lid" URLs
>
> (someone) wrote me:
>
> > I've just noticed a couple of Internet drafts that propose and refer to a
> > URI scheme called lid:
> >
> > draft-blackketter-lid-00.txt
> > draft-finseth-isanlid-00.txt
> >
> > I have two thoughts:
> >
> > (a) these lid:'s look more like URNs to me
> >
> > (b) the lid draft claims that lid:'s are simulatneously URIs and URNs, but
> > they don't conform to URN syntax (in not having a leading "urn:" or
> > namespace identifier parts).
>
> I don't have a problem with URL-schemes that have URN-like semantics,
> since there are enough of them already (cid, news, etc.). I think the
> wording (saying that lid URLs are URNs) probably needs to change, since
> it just adds confusion.
>
> Larry