Re: Submit TV-URI work to IESG ? (was: Re: "lid" URLs)

From: Philipp Hoschka (ph@w3.org)
Date: Tue, May 02 2000

  • Next message: Venkatesh D N: "TV Back Channel"

    Message-ID: <390F1570.78A24470@w3.org>
    Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 19:50:40 +0200
    From: Philipp Hoschka <ph@w3.org>
    To: Dan Zigmond <djz@corp.webtv.net>, "'Larry Masinter'" <LM@att.com>, uri@w3.org, www-tv@w3.org
    Subject: Re: Submit TV-URI work to IESG ? (was: Re: "lid" URLs)
    
    In the meantime, I just out that the tv: URI document is currently 
    in the RFC editor queue
    http://www.rfc-editor.org/queue.html
    
    It should be issued as an informational/experimental RFC soon.
    
    Philipp Hoschka a écrit :
    > 
    > Dan,
    > 
    > this may be an issue: I can't find the draft on the list of
    > things the IESG is currently working on
    > http://www.ietf.org/IESG/status.html
    > 
    > You may want to go back and check that things didn't get lost
    > somewhere.
    > 
    > -Philipp
    > 
    > Dan Zigmond a écrit :
    > >
    > > Philipp,
    > >
    > > Yes, I did forward the current "tv:" spec to the IESG shortly after my last
    > > posting.  So they are working on it.
    > >
    > > If we have some consensus around "lid:" as well, I'll certainly forward that
    > > too.
    > >
    > >         Dan
    > >
    > > ---------------------------------------------------
    > > Dan Zigmond
    > > Senior Group Manager, Client Technologies
    > > WebTV Networks, Inc.
    > > djz@corp.webtv.net
    > > ---------------------------------------------------
    > >
    > > -----Original Message-----
    > > From: Philipp Hoschka [mailto:ph@w3.org]
    > > Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2000 9:07 PM
    > > To: Dan Zigmond
    > > Cc: 'Larry Masinter'; 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