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 >Received on Tuesday, 25 September 2001 10:44:39 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:03 UTC