- From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Mon, 06 Sep 2004 16:53:10 +0100
- To: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>, uri@w3.org
At 16:48 29/08/04 -0700, Larry Masinter wrote: >2.3 Demonstrated utility > >I'd like to suggest that we require something stronger: that new >URI schemes have demonstratable, new, long-lived >utility: > > Because URI schemes are a single, global namespace, the > unrestricted registration of many new URI schemes can > clutter implementation space, and possibly lead to > contention for "short names". For this reason, new > URI schemes should have a clear utility to the broad > Internet community, and provide some means of identifying > resources that is not already available with previously > registered URI schemes. > >Perhaps this is controversial :) Hmmm... I think there's a valid concern expressed here, and maybe the (potentially) controversial aspect can be made less so by something like this: [[ [...] and provide some means of identifying resources or other widely desired benefit that is not already available with previously registered URI schemes. ]] Rationale: the original wording might be severely interpreted to argue against the registration of any new media type (which would be counter-productive to the document's purpose), but I think the broader wording still retains the onus for genuine incremental utility to be demonstrated for for a new scheme. #g ------------ Graham Klyne For email: http://www.ninebynine.org/#Contact
Received on Monday, 6 September 2004 16:20:00 UTC