- From: <Harald.T.Alvestrand@uninett.no>
- Date: Sun, 26 Nov 1995 22:52:15 +0100
- To: asg@severn.wash.inmet.com (Al Gilman)
- Cc: uri@bunyip.com
Al, (note: I've taken ietf-types off the recipient list; I hate multilist debates, and I think this has drifted far enough away from ietf-types' main domain by now) thanks for presenting your thoughts on this subject! My immediate reactions include: - we need an Internet information architecture, and Chris Weider has started forming an Internet Research Task Force to work on this. Karen Sollins is involved. Make sure this stuff gets there. - I think the mixing of "precise reference" with "jumble of material that might be useful for finding the referenced object" is a Bad Thing. - I think that the DRUMS group may be a nice sounding board for evaluating your suggested re-restrictions of header fields, while you are just in the right place for discussing your suggested URI extensions. Specific to the last point: > mailto: URLs able to nominate but not dictate header values > for resulting RFC 822 message May agree, but have security worries. > > mid: Citations in HTML and MIME headers able to quote existing > resource header values for retrieval assistance Disagree, because I think it mixes referring with searching. The current in-reply-to syntax is, IMHO, a hindrance to interoperable referrals, not a help. > > common syntax for header-in-URI embedding for the above two. No problem, IF it is a good idea. > > In-reply-to, References, etc. headers refined, not extended. > is: *( msg_id | phrase ) > to_be: *( msg_id | cite | subject-phrase) > ; where "cite" is the URI-embedding syntax This MIGHT be a backwards-compatible change, if the chosen syntax for "cite" is legal under 822 rules. There's always the theory that you could end up with old values being treated as if they were URIs, but I don't see it as a big problem. The proper arena for suggesting backwards-compatible changes to 822 is either the MAILEXT list or the DRUMS list, I think. Sounds as if we're not that far apart on this one.... Harald
Received on Sunday, 26 November 1995 18:30:23 UTC