- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2011 20:01:42 -0400
- To: ext Rich Tibbett <rich.tibbett@gmail.com>
- CC: Marcos Caceres <marcosscaceres@gmail.com>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Jun/9/2011 7:09 PM, ext Rich Tibbett wrote: > On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 1:29 PM, Marcos Caceres<marcosscaceres@gmail.com> wrote: >> To fix it, the widget URI spec needs to respond with HTTP responses >> when a URI is dereferenced... similar to what blob:// does: >> >> http://www.w3.org/TR/FileAPI/#processingModel > Are there are any plans to undertake a Provisional (or Permanent) URI > Scheme Registration for the widget URI? [1] The guidelines and > procedures of that process seem to form a handy general checklist for > minting URI schemes and should be capable of catching idiosyncrasies > such as this. > > Perhaps we should get the widget URI proposal peer reviewed by the W3C > URI IG [2] and, perhaps, the IETF HTTP WG [3] before publication also. > I mention this since you mention the blob URI scheme. That has > recently been making the rounds on both of the listservs mentioned > above resulting in some interesting discussions. FYI, a separate list for discussions about schemes for packaging Web applications and the like was created and used for this spec: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pkg-uri-scheme/ The IETF's uri-review list was also used for this spec: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/uri-review/current/msg01131.html -AB
Received on Friday, 10 June 2011 00:02:26 UTC