Re: updated mailto draft

Martin Duerst wrote:
> 
> Dear URI Experts,
> 
> There is now a new mailto draft at
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-duerst-mailto-bis-01.txt.

Dates on the draft weren't updated. (published Feb., expires Aug.?)

> This takes into account a lot of comments, but we have unfortunately
> not yet had the time to deal with comments in the thread starting
> at http://www.w3.org/mid/0II90086I4VOX5@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com,
> and also some comments from Bruce Lilly. We plan to deal with
> them in the next version (planned for after the upcomming IETF).
> 
> In the meantime, any further comments are highly appreciated.

Section 3 says 'A mailto URI designates an "internet resource", which is the 
mailbox specified in the address.'

Since multiple addresses/mailboxes can be put into a single mailto URI, this 
statement seems less than ideal. What is the 'resource' represented by a 
mailto URI that contains 5 addr-specs?

Since addr-specs are comma-separated, why require the use of "%2C" instead of 
a raw "," to separate them?  It seems to go against the conventional wisdom 
that percent-encoded reserved characters constitute part of the represented 
data while raw reserved characters constitute part of the structure of the 
URI.  The comma is being used as a sub-delim rather than data, and it isn't 
used anywhere else, so why not say "," has the reserved purpose (in this 
scheme) of separating addr-specs? Then, since RFC 2822 makes it pretty clear 
that "," would never be found in an addr-spec, you could add that "%2C" is 
also valid as a separator, thereby implying that mailto:addr1,addr2,addr3 and 
mailto:addr1%2Caddr2%2Caddr3 are equivalent when using scheme-based 
normalization (RFC 3986 sec. 6.2.3). So I suggest:
  
  to = [ addr-spec *(("," / "%2C") addr-spec) ]

Apologies if this has been discussed already; I didn't pay much attention
to the previous posts on this topic.

Mike

Received on Monday, 7 November 2005 05:21:22 UTC