- From: Erik Wilde <dret@berkeley.edu>
- Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 10:30:17 +0200
- To: URI <uri@w3.org>
- CC: Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>, Felix Sasaki <felix.sasaki@fh-potsdam.de>
hello.
i think there is a lot of meat in this discussion from the perspective
of web architecture. to a large extent, this is getting back to the old
question about "when to create new URI schemes".
Larry Masinter wrote:
> urn:tdb::data:,the%20host%20www.ccil.org
this is an interesting approach, and creates completely opaque URIs, not
that much different from data:, i think. in general, the options for
identifying something that is not by its very nature a HTTP-accessible
resource are:
- use http: anyway with some special rules attached (eg, httpRange-14).
- use an opaque scheme such as data: or urn:tdb::
- create a new scheme.
i think there is value to a new scheme if there are specific
interactions with resources of that new type. for example, there is a
lot of value now in tel: URIs because more and more browsers also are
phones, so they can provide users with a useful (and non-HTTP) way of
interacting with the identified resources (HTTP-only browsers could use
skype or provide phone book lookup services, too, btw). anyway, my point
is that tel: now proves its utility because URIs can simply refer to a
phone and by the mere fact of identifying them, there are well-known
methods of interaction. it's really just following a hyperlink, only
that the link takes the user outside of the realm of HTTP.
the reason why i am bringing this old debate up again is that felix,
michael (cc'ed) and i will start a W3C incubation group soon, which will
look at "location and the web". one of my goals there is to explore the
question of a possible location URI scheme (among other things), because
i think that there are many interesting and rich interactions around
resources of the "location" type. i do know there will be pushback (i
proposed it on uri@w3.org a while ago and the main pushback was to go
the "everything should be a HTTP URI" route), but a W3C incubation group
will be the perfect vehicle for discussing the merits of different
approaches of how to make the web location-aware.
and regardless of the location theme, i think the general question of
"when to mint URI schemes" is a very interesting one. my working theory
still is that it should be done if (and maybe only if) there are known
or predicted methods (that's fuzzy, but i cannot think of a better way
of saying it) of how to interact with that specific kind of resource.
cheers,
erik wilde tel:+1-510-6432253 - fax:+1-510-6425814
dret@berkeley.edu - http://dret.net/netdret
UC Berkeley - School of Information (ISchool)
Received on Friday, 26 June 2009 08:31:20 UTC