Re: URLs and a private scheme type

Paul Hoffman (ietf-lists@proper.com)
Tue, 3 Jan 1995 15:57:37 -0800


Message-Id: <ab2f94350d0210033324@[165.227.40.32]>
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 1995 15:57:37 -0800
To: <uri@bunyip.com>
From: ietf-lists@proper.com (Paul Hoffman)
Subject: Re: URLs and a private scheme type

At 12:38 PM 1/3/95, Tom Sears wrote:
. . .
>Would there also be a benefit from adding
>a "private" scheme?
. . .
>Are there alternative
>suggestions?  Would such an addition be valuable to others?

Why not just use an "x-" scheme name that you make up? That way, you don't
have to worrry about leakage between two domains using "private" for two
different things. Just use "x-cserve-1:". Note the "-1": you can have
different versions of the scheme if you guess wrong the first time!

--Paul Hoffman
--Proper Publishing