W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webarch-comments@w3.org > October to December 2004

RE: Use of "assign" for URI -> resource

From: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 09:59:53 -0700
To: "'Stuart Williams'" <skw@hp.com>
Cc: public-webarch-comments@w3.org, Tony Hansen <tony@att.com>, "'Paul Hoffman / IMC'" <phoffman@imc.org>
Message-id: <0I5F00H5GJ7TZJ@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com>

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,
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.

Could the TAG review these documents and consider how
the advice about URI ownership affects the advice?
What advice, if any, would the TAG give about "ownership"
in URI scheme definitions?

Please include Tony Hansen and Paul Hoffman in
discussions about RFC 2717 & 2718 updates.

Larry

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/2004Aug/0007.html
Received on Monday, 11 October 2004 17:00:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:26:47 UTC