- From: Kristof Zelechovski <giecrilj@stegny.2a.pl>
- Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 23:56:08 +0200
- To: "'David Booth'" <david@dbooth.org>
- Cc: "'Ian Hickson'" <ian@hixie.ch>, <uri-review@ietf.org>, <hybi@ietf.org>, <uri@w3.org>
A "custom protocol" is, using David's terms, an owner-dependent protocol, whereas a "standard protocol" is an owner-independent protocol. "Owner" is the owner of the aliasing domain. A protocol is owner-dependent if the server is guaranteed to belong to the owner (e.g. a bank or an ISP). HTH, Chris -----Original Message----- From: David Booth [mailto:david@dbooth.org] Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 11:19 PM To: Kristof Zelechovski Cc: 'Ian Hickson'; uri-review@ietf.org; hybi@ietf.org; uri@w3.org Subject: RE: [Uri-review] ws: and wss: schemes On Tue, 2009-08-11 at 18:35 +0200, Kristof Zelechovski wrote: > > 2. Additionally, the proposed solution of using the URI prefix > "http://wss.example/" is suited for custom protocols, according to the > description at [1]. A protocol promulgated by the WWW Corporation can > hardly be viewed as custom. I don't know exactly what you mean by "custom protocol", but WSS is *exactly* the kind of protocol that [1] was talking about. The introduction uses "XyzConsortium" as an example, but you can think "WWW Corporation" instead. David
Received on Tuesday, 11 August 2009 21:57:03 UTC