W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > August 2004

Re: Historic scheme drafts

From: John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 18:15:27 -0400
To: Paul Hoffman / IMC <phoffman@imc.org>
Cc: uri@w3.org
Message-ID: <20040819221527.GA7004@skunk.reutershealth.com>

Paul Hoffman / IMC scripsit:

> 	Title		: The ftp: Scheme
> 	Filename	: draft-hoffman-ftp-uri-00.txt
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hoffman-ftp-uri-00.txt

I suggest that the ";type=" syntax be dropped, as it does not seem to
be widely implemented.  In practice, dereferencing is done by guessing.

> 	Title		: The gopher: Scheme
> 	Filename	: draft-hoffman-gopher-uri-00.txt
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hoffman-gopher-uri-00.txt

Should this be stripped down to handle only Gopher and not Gopher+?
My sense is that Gopher+ URLs were never implemented and should
be allowed to go historic.

> 	Title		: The news: and nntp: Schemes
> 	Filename	: draft-hoffman-news-nntp-uri-00.txt
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hoffman-news-nntp-uri-00.txt

The next draft should either explain the difference between the news
and nntp schemes or state explicitly that there is none.

> 	Title		: The prospero: Scheme
> 	Filename	: draft-hoffman-prospero-uri-00.txt
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hoffman-prospero-uri-00.txt

Should this scheme be allowed to become historic along with RFC 1738?

> - We need to decide whether I should update the non-file: drafts to 
> reflect current reality or simply to use the text from 1738. It would 
> be a bad idea to update some but not all.

They should be updated.

-- 
Dream projects long deferred            John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
usually bite the wax tadpole.            http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
        --James Lileks                  http://www.reutershealth.com
Received on Thursday, 19 August 2004 22:15:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:08 UTC