W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > August 2002

Re: proposed charter items for possible URI working group

From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 03:38:38 +0200
To: "Larry Masinter" <LMM@acm.org>
Cc: <uri@w3.org>, "Roy Fielding" <fielding@apache.org>
Message-ID: <7c4elu47bqrmuqnt7i1e8bt9d23jd7m3om@4ax.com>

* Larry Masinter wrote:
>I've been asked to propose a charter for a possible URI working
>group to work on next phase topics. The working group should
>be narrowly focused to insure viability and keep us from wandering
>into unsolvable problems. For this purpose, I propose the
>following items to be in scope:

I'd like to have a BCP RFC documenting the recent practise for new
fragment identification mechanisms like XPointer or as proposed in
XFrames to use some functional notations in the fragment identifier
just like

  document#xpointer(...)
  document#frames(...)
  document#xmlns(...)%20element(...)
  ...

>OTHER TOPICS
>
>I think it would be good to finally 'obsolete' RFC 1738,
>but it's necessary to do something, I think, with the
>URI scheme definitions that are only documented there:
>"file" is used widely but documented correctly nowhere.
>"http" was defined in the HTTP spec and "mailto" has its
>own RFC, "telnet" is still used, "news" and "gopher"
>less so, and I haven't seen a "nttp", "wais" or "prospero"
>in years.

'nntp' is less common, because most software allows the 'news' scheme to
refer to NNTP servers, just like

  news://nntp.example.org/

followed by either a message id or a news group name. 'news' is rather
common, though, but mostly on Usenet for obvious reasons.
Received on Sunday, 11 August 2002 21:38:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:04 UTC