W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > January 1995

Re: mailserver scheme, third round

From: Paul Hoffman <ietf-lists@proper.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1995 10:06:07 -0800
Message-Id: <ab40657305021003bac7@[]>
To: "Daniel W. Connolly" <connolly@hal.com>
Cc: uri@bunyip.com
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.

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

--Paul Hoffman
--Proper Publishing
Received 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