At 9:39 AM 1/16/95, Daniel W. Connolly wrote: >As long as we're not using the mailto: name, I suggest we use the >same name that the MIME spec gives to this functionality, i.e. >mail-server. That would have been a good idea before RFC1738 was submitted, but I think it is unwise now that "mailserver" (unhyphenated) is already a reserved name there. >Wherever possible, I think the MIME external-body access type >namespace and the URI scheme namespace should coincide. It seems silly >to have different names for the same functionality -- or even worse -- >different functionality by the same name. I agree completely. We should keep an eye out for this in future URL scheme names. It is unfortunate that we didn't do that in this case six months ago. --Paul Hoffman --Proper PublishingReceived on Monday, 16 January 1995 13:04:07 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Sunday, 10 October 2021 22:17:29 UTC