W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > November 2001

RE: RFC2518 (WebDAV) / RFC2396 (URI) inconsistency

From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 10:35:53 +0200
Message-ID: <2BF0AD29BC31FE46B78877321144043162184D@trebe003.NOE.Nokia.com>
To: piotr@ideanest.com, uri@w3.org


> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Piotr Kaminski [mailto:piotr@ideanest.com]
> Sent: 22 November, 2001 09:31
> To: Stickler Patrick (NRC/Tampere); uri@w3.org
> Subject: Re: RFC2518 (WebDAV) / RFC2396 (URI) inconsistency
> 
> 
> Patrick Stickler proposed:
> > My proposal was specifically:
> >
> >    URI ::= scheme ":"
> >    URI ::= "urn"  ":" <NID> ":"
> >
> > The first case is not a valid URI for the scheme, but is a valid
> > URI denoting the scheme. The second case is not a valid URI for
> > the URN namespace, but is a valid URI denoting the URN namespace.
> 
> How about a URI scheme for URI schemes?  Something like:
> 
>    scheme:dav
>    scheme:http
>    scheme:urn:someNID
> 
> and, of course,
> 
>    scheme:scheme
> 
> This would let everybody refer to URI schemes in the same 
> way, and doesn't
> need any changes in grammar or interpretation for current 
> standards.  

That would be an advantage.

> The
> disadvantage being that it introduces yet another scheme...

Quite so.

I also suspect that *alot* of applications already treat URI
scheme prefixes as unique identifiers (even if not fully valid
URIs) and so a change to (or perhaps merely an interpretation of) 
the current specs such as I proposed would be more backwards
compatible.

Cheers,

Patrick

--
               
Patrick Stickler              Phone: +358 50 483 9453
Senior Research Scientist     Fax:   +358 7180 35409
Nokia Research Center         Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.com
Received on Thursday, 22 November 2001 03:36:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:03 UTC