- 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