- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 16:29:55 -0500
- To: John Merrells <merrells@sxip.com>, Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>
- Cc: uri@w3.org, Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>, dix@ietf.org
I learned at a W3C authorization workshop this week http://www.w3.org/2005/Security/usability-ws/program that there's a SXIP/DIX BOF at the IETF next week. http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/06mar/agenda/dix.html I'm pretty excited about DIX/SXIP and related web-like authorization mechanisms, but I don't think I can swing the trip to Dallas. Section 7 of http://dixs.org/index.php/Draft-merrells-dix-01.txt says "This document has no IANA Actions." but section 3.2.6. DIX URI Namespace introduces a new URI scheme. Introducing a new URI scheme just for DIX is not a good use of scarce community resources; let's not do the DAV: thing again. Instead of dix:/homesite just use something like http://dixs.org/terms#homesite There are some IANA considerations around dixs.org; IANA should make sure that name is reserved for this purpose in perpetuity if this spec is adopted. Or the DIX profile should use iana.org or ietf.org . (There's a BCP that says to use urn:ietf , but I recommend against that; I intend to renew the internet draft that argues for http/dns rather than urn:ietf: .) The draft charter also doesn't say that DIX is introducing a new URI scheme. http://dixs.org/index.php/DIX_Charter Please add something to the charter about getting review for the dix: scheme. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Friday, 17 March 2006 21:30:54 UTC