- From: Austin Cheney <austin.cheney@travelocity.com>
- Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 12:44:24 -0700 (PDT)
- To: uri@w3.org
It seems in this draft, revision 06, that the examples are a syntax that are non-normative. It would be better if the syntax were formatted in a standard convention, such as XML or even JSON. This should be done in a manner that is not protocol dependent. It would be more appropriate to define the concept generally and then use a separate numbered section of the document to mention processing requirements specific to a protocol and a sub-point for requirements specific to a markup language in the context of that transmission protocol. Within the definition of URI syntax the mailto: protocol extension appears non-normative. To be more conforming it SHOULD be used as smtp://. Such usage identifies the protocol name and uses URI syntax to separate the protocol identification from the following resource or identification data. In other words, this example appears to be a valid URI: smtp://cheney@mailmarkup.org. This importance of this consideration rests in the future extensibility of SMTP as a service oriented protocol with superior server processing and security capabilities than HTTP allows opposed to merely a message routing mechanism. If a markup language is adopted for standard use over SMTP exclusively the conventions used in that markup language MUST conform to protocol independent standards in order to communicate seamlessly with transmissions or documents in the HTTP protocol or other protocols. In other words, if a markup language is adopted for the SMTP protocol then communications SHOULD be able to seamless move between SMTP and HTTP based communications if the user-agent software is capable of processing such. All that is required is a properly formatted absolute URI. If standards exist to define methods that are acceptable in one condition but are conflicting in an alternate peer condition transmission collisions are likely to arise where the only solutions are bloated work-arounds. To be further specific, if standards are adopted as corner-cases for protocol specific processing they MUST be explicitly and intentionally limited to that protocol or not be considered a standard. Additionally, if a markup language is adopted for SMTP then it may be necessary to allow user to user hyperlinks using URI syntax in parallel with URI syntax for webpages over HTTP. Both methods point to a destination that may or may not require interactivity, input, or responses. It cannot and MUST NOT be presumed that SMTP is limited to sending communications opposed to opening a transmission for engaging in a sessioned data service. In order to ensure the convention addressed by this draft has the longest and most stable life-span possible please ensure its use in different communication modes is stable to the URI standard, the language of the specification is not protocol specific, and the intention of the document is enhancement of the URI standard and not a function of HTML. "Martin J. Dürst" wrote: > > For your information, this is just a resubmission with the copyright > stuff adjusted and a few references updated where necessary. > > Any comments that have been made very recently on the -05 version > will be read as applying to the -06 version. If you have commented > a long time ago, I might have overlooked your comment, and a gentle > reminder would help. > > Regards, Martin. > >>From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org >>Subject: I-D Action:draft-duerst-mailto-bis-06.txt >>Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 02:45:02 -0700 (PDT) > >>A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. >> >> Title : The 'mailto' URI Scheme >> Author(s) : M. Duerst, et al. >> Filename : draft-duerst-mailto-bis-06.txt >> Pages : 18 >> Date : 2009-03-09 >> >>This document defines the format of Uniform Resource Identifiers >>(URI) to identify resources that are reached using Internet mail. It >>adds better internationalization and compatibility with IRIs (RFC >>3987) to the previous syntax of 'mailto' URIs (RFC 2368). >> >>A URL for this Internet-Draft is: >>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-duerst-mailto-bis-06.txt >> >>Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >>ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >> >>Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader >>implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the >>Internet-Draft. >> >> >><ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-duerst-mailto-bis-06.txt> >>_______________________________________________ >>I-D-Announce mailing list >>I-D-Announce@ietf.org >>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce >>Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html >>or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt > > > #-#-# Martin J. Du"rst, Assoc. Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University > #-#-# http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp > > > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Fwd%3A-I-D-Action%3Adraft-duerst-mailto-bis-06.txt-tp22489628p23163478.html Sent from the w3.org - uri mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Received on Thursday, 23 April 2009 05:35:34 UTC