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

RE: I-D ACTION:draft-hansen-2717bis-2718bis-uri-guidelines-01.txt

From: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 11:01:02 -0800
To: "'uri'" <uri@w3.org>
Message-id: <0I8K006QDNHQQB@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com>

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hansen-2717bis-2718bis-uri-guideli
nes-01.txt 

I'd like to move this document along quickly, since it's
been overdue such a long time. So far, we had a comment about:

#   Any scheme starting with the letters "U" and "R", in particular if it
#   attaches any of the meanings "uniform", "universal" or "unifying" to
#   the first letter, is going to cause intense debate, and generate much
#   heat (but maybe little light).  Any such proposal should either make
#   sure that there is a large consensus behind it that it will be the
#   only scheme of its type, or pick another name.

that it

> ... sounds like an in-joke 
>  that no one will understand in a few years. In fact, I can't figure 
>  out the "R" part. I suggest changing the first sentence to say "Any 
>  scheme whose name indicates a meaning that includes "universal", ...".

I suggest getting rid of this paragraph, but expanding the existing
paragraph ("Avoid using names that are either very general purpose or ...")
to also say

   Avoid scheme names which are overly general or grandiose (e.g., allude
   to their "universal" or "standard" nature when the namespace
   described is not.)

Would that be more helpful? I could imagine a "upc:" URI scheme
if it were mapped to the uniform product code, but not a "uj" or "urs".

Larry
Received on Saturday, 11 December 2004 19:01:12 UTC

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