- From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Sat, 06 Apr 2002 07:54:47 +0100
- To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@apache.org>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: "Tim Berners-Lee" <timbl@w3.org>, "Paul Prescod" <paul@prescod.net>, uri@w3.org
[I noticed this pair of messages, one from Roy on WWW-tag@w3.org, the other from Mark on uri@w3.org. to avoid cross-posting, I've continued this on the URI list only.] I think Mark's observation here rather underscores Roy's point. The "resource" identified by a mailto: URI would appear to be, in Roy's words, "a composition window with the following pre-filled attributes" rather than a mailbox. #g -- At 12:38 PM 4/4/02 -0800, Mark Nottingham wrote: >The 'mailto' [1] and proposed 'sms' [2] schemes allow multiple resources >to be identified by a single URI; e.g., > > mailto:bob@example.org,mary@example.com > sms:+41796431851,+4116321035 > >Is this encouraged in new schemes? I.e., is it a good idea to have a >one-to-many uri-to-resource mapping? > > >1. http://rfc2368.x42.com/ >2. http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-wilde-sms-uri-02.txt At 03:52 PM 4/4/02 -0800, Roy T. Fielding wrote: >>The mailto: schema name was badly chosen, but the concept is >>sound as originally defined. It was intended simply to be a space >>in which to put all the internet email addresses, which are called >>mailboxes. A mailbox is an abstract thing, related to email messages >>by (for example) To: From: and Cc: feilds but also used in many >>other situations. It also normally has a relationship with the social >>entity >>-- typically a person or group --which owns it. > >Hmm, well, from my perspective outside the early CERN days, I'd have to >disagree. >Mailto has been consistently defined and implemented to mean "get a >composition >window with the following pre-filled attributes." I absolutely agree that >what >we should have is a URI for a mailbox that can be placed in a form for >defining >the action of a POST, but mailto was created before FORM was invented. > >I think it is critical that we not try to redefine the semantics of existing >URI after they have been introduced to the Web. If someone wants a generic >URI for mailbox, they are going to have to invent something other than mailto >for that purpose. Wishful thinking is not interoperable. > >....Roy ------------------- Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Saturday, 6 April 2002 04:15:52 UTC