RE: Proposed language change for Hansen 2717/2718

I think the main concern with your counter-proposal is that
it might encourage people to "stake out" the "good names"
in the registry, because uniqueness is offered with no review.

Instead, we're trying to make permanent registration easy
enough that the failure you're concerned about ("2 years
for review") doesn't happen.

> My primary concern with the Hansen 2717/18 draft as written is the
> inability to assure registration of a unique scheme token in the URI
> namespace at the beginning of the innovation cycle, that is, 
> at the time a scheme is registered as a provisional scheme.

It should be possible to register a unique scheme name
at the beginning of the "innovation cycle" by filling out
a form, and a short review. Unless there are egregious problems,
the registration would happen whether or not the reviewers
actually liked the content of the registration.


Received on Wednesday, 9 February 2005 19:40:38 UTC