From: "Larry Masinter" <LMM@acm.org> > > To permit multiple URI Scheme registrations for any given token is to > > severely impair the usefulness of provisional registration. It affords > > no protection against either careless or malicious registrations that > > would compromise a given provisional registration. > > I disagree about "no protection" -- it adds some protection > against inadvertent duplication (because it allows publication > of a URI scheme usage), and even against malicious registration > (because registration includes sufficient information for the > community to react.) I vaguely recall that the agrument supporting duplication (when this was discussed it seems like quite a while ago) was that it would be allowed only where the two communities of use were so different that collision was very unlikely. --RayReceived on Tuesday, 11 January 2005 18:32:55 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Sunday, 10 October 2021 22:17:46 UTC