- From: Eric Hellman <eric@openly.com>
- Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2004 00:51:35 -0400
- To: uri@w3.org
I observe that there is an "school of thought" which posits that any resource can and should be identified with an http URI. Without addressing the merits of that argument, I would say the existence of that argument, and the significant ignorance of that argument among many important groups of implementers makes the not-already-available-with-previously-registered-URI-schemes criterion automatically controversial. Perhaps this is obvious. 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 :) -- Eric Hellman, President Openly Informatics, Inc. eric@openly.com 2 Broad St., 2nd Floor tel 1-973-509-7800 fax 1-734-468-6216 Bloomfield, NJ 07003 http://www.openly.com/1cate/ 1 Click Access To Everything
Received on Wednesday, 8 September 2004 04:51:45 UTC