[closed] RE: Use of "assign" for URI -> resource

On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 11:59, Larry Masinter wrote:
> The web architecture document is authored by the TAG,
> and is a conceptual framework that the TAG offers to the
> rest of the world. I was hoping to improve the explanatory
> framework with wording I thought would result in less
> confusion. I can 'live with' whatever wording you choose,

For the present last call of the First Edition of webarch, this
seems to be closed.

> but I do have a request:
>
> In the IETF, we have started some efforts to revise
> the guidelines for new URI schemes and the process
> for registering them (RFCs 2717 and 2718). [1] It is
> in the context of describing what makes a "good"
> scheme definition that the TAG's description of
> architecture of URIs causes difficulty, and taking
> a more operational approach would be helpful.

We've followed up on that elsewhere. As the documents we
are to review have only recently become available,
so we're not considering them as input to this last
call.

> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/2004Aug/0007.html
-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E