W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-iri@w3.org > August 2011

Re: Some additional comments on 4395bis

From: Mykyta Yevstifeyev <evnikita2@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2011 06:57:53 +0300
Message-ID: <4E5719C1.5070202@gmail.com>
To: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
CC: "public-iri@w3.org" <public-iri@w3.org>
26.08.2011 0:06, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> <hat type='individual'/>
> On 8/21/11 4:23 AM, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote:
>> Hello again,
>> As IRI WG is still working on 4395bis, I'd like we considered the
>> following two issues:
>> - URI/IRI schemes de-assignment.  The issue was raised by Frank
>> Ellermann on uri-review list recently [1]; it is that particular
>> provisionally-registered schemes can be de-assigned by their
>> registrants.  RFC 4395 says nothing about this; so I suppose 4395bis
>> will have something to say.  (BTW, this feature may be useful for 'afs'
>> URI scheme, which has "hung" in the undefined state from 1994, time of
>> publication of RFC 1738).
> Doesn't that apply to all provisional registrations, not only to
> provisional URI scheme registrations?

Well, RFC 3864 says nothing about such action with provisional 
registrations.  Neither does RFC 4395.  And I believe this may be 
applied to provisional registration; so I amend my proposal: 
"Provisional URI/IRI schemes de-assignment".

>> -Exact format of IANA registry.  This is as required by RFC 5226 and
>> what has yet been undefined.  Taking into account IANA's effort to
>> transform all the registries into XML, the explicit description is
>> desired.  Current HTML registry [2] has 3 columns: Scheme name,
>> Description, and Reference, whereas the authors aren't obliged to fill
>> in or mention the values of the second column; IANA is thus responsible
>> for writing something there.  For some schemes, eg. 'view-source',
>> 'pack' et al., this is quite problematic; therefore, my proposal: in the
>> IANA considerations section of 4395bis include the description of the
>> registry, skipping the "Description" column itself.
> I would prefer to say that the registrant needs to provide the
> description. What you suggest sounds like we are asking IANA to remove
> that column from the existing registry.

The "Description' column isn't useful when either a single template or a 
reference is provided; so the reader may be pointed there for 
description of scheme's usage.


> Peter
Received on Friday, 26 August 2011 04:27:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:14:42 UTC