RE: Excess URI schemes considered harmful

At 05:12 AM 2001-09-25 , Rob Lanphier wrote:
>At 02:15 PM 9/24/2001 -0400, Tim Berners-Lee wrote:

>I'm confused by this statement.  In your estimation, is the Eastlake 
>proposal to solve this problem a Good Thing, a Bad Thing, or just a 
>Thing.  For your reference:
>
><http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-eastlake-cturi-02.txt>http://ww
w.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-eastlake-cturi-02.txt
>
>I'm assuming you see this as a Bad Thing, at which point, I anxiously await 
>an alternate proposal.

AG::  

For alternate proposal, see Masinter's 'tdb' scheme.

<http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-masinter-dated-uri-00.txt>http:/
/www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-masinter-dated-uri-00.txt

The information desired is provided by a namespaced reference to the [sub-]
type name where the namespace binds the usage to a dated version of the IANA
registry contents.

The IANA Registry provides the defining instance of the name/definition
association for Internet Media Types.  A dated reference is needed to create a
fixed referend, as the registry is editable and may later bind new definition
to a pre-existing name string.

The cturi: scheme capability is IMHO entirely handled within the capabilities
of the tdb: scheme as proposed by Masinter.  Not necessarily to say the latter
is perfect, but it is enough better so that the cturi: proposal should not be
revived unless thatDescribedBy dated reference to a name as used in the IANA
registry (of date certain) is somehow found not to do the job.

$.02

Al

>
>Thanks
>Rob
>