- From: <hardie@qualcomm.com>
- Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 17:17:18 -0600
- To: uri@w3.org
Larry Masinter and I had a chance to grab some time in the hallways of this IETF meeting, to discuss the future of the draft on non-IETF URI schemes. One of the sticking points all along has been how to avoid name collisions in these, and we discussed this around a couple of straw proposals that he and I generated out of cookies and hot tea. None of them were really satisfying, though, and we eventually came to the conclusion that the collision problem in other IANA registries were simply a not big enough problem to put people through any syntactic hoops for this. I'd like to suggest, therefore that we revise the doc to say essentially: Non-IETF tree URI schemes are registered by the IANA by providing the IANA a template document that shows who has change control, gives a name for that change controller, the proposed scheme name, and a precis of the URI scheme's syntax. The IANA would then construct and assign a URI scheme of the form: orgname-schemename. The IANA will allow only single orgname per organization, will generally choose the one associated with the MIME registry if it is available, and may refuse a suggested organization name and propose another at its discretion (chiefly to avoid collision, but at its discretion). The IANA will use the "expert reviewer" mechanism for assignment, and that reviewer will assure that the proposed scheme is a syntactically correct URI, but will not review its proposed operation or semantics. Does this make sense to folks as the right balance of achieving uniqueness, ensuring syntactic correctness, and avoiding a heavyweight, slow process? regards, Ted Hardie
Received on Tuesday, 11 November 2003 18:17:23 UTC