- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 08:55:20 +0200
- To: arun@mozilla.com
- CC: uri@w3.org, GK@ninebynine.org, joseph@josephholsten.com
On 2011-08-11 21:08, Arun Ranganathan wrote: > ... > Actually, since the last time we discussed this, I've strengthened the > requirements considerably, even suggesting character ranges from > Unicode. I stop just shy of REQUIRING UUID, but you'll note that this is > a substantial change (banning reserved chars, etc.). Your suggestion to > me was to flesh out the "repertoire" of the opaqueString production, and > I've tried to do just that, but also allowed Chrome's use of blob: URI > labeling (I disagree with it, but not strongly enough to tell them not > to do it). I think we've probably got a pretty good guarantee of global > uniqueness; not least of all, I REQUIRE global uniqueness, make a > prescription, and leave the actual detail to implementers. I think this > stands as sufficient. > ... I appreciate the effort :-) It doesn't change the fact that you can't get reliable global uniqueness unless you require a *specific* format. Please remind me: why can't you required a UUID + postfix? Best regards, Julian
Received on Friday, 12 August 2011 06:56:03 UTC