W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > June 2011

Re: Definition of blob URI Scheme

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2011 09:55:19 +1000
Cc: Arun Ranganathan <arun@mozilla.com>, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>, uri@w3.org, Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
Message-Id: <C13F67FE-F0E2-4A89-958B-1134734C5CA9@mnot.net>
To: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
Philippe -

I discussed this with the expert for URI scheme registration. 

Re (1) - It's common practice in the IETF to place the registration template in the document, but this isn't strictly required; you could just submit the template separate, in the request to IANA.

Re (2) - it isn't necessary to wait until LC to get review on the list.

Re (3) - It's possible to request provision registration as soon as the URI-review feedback has been dealt with -- no need to wait for CR.

Cheers,



On 22/06/2011, at 5:01 AM, Philippe Le Hegaret wrote:

> Hi Mark,
> 
> I'd like to check with you my understanding of RFC 4395 [1].
> 
> The FIle API specification contains the definition of the blob URI
> scheme [2]. Following the registration procedure, my understanding is
> that:
> 1- Arun should reformat section 6.7.1 [2] (or include a new section) to
> follow the template at [3];
> 2- Once our specification is in LC, Arun should send an email to
> uri-review@ietf.org asking for review (and address whatever comments
> come out of that);
> 3- At CR, Arun should request registration from IANA (iana@iana.org),
> asking for provisional status;
> 4- At PR (or REC?), Arun should request permanent status from IANA.
> 
> Do you concur with those steps?
> 
> Philippe
> 
> [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4395#page-9
> [2] http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/FileAPI/#ABNFForBlob
> [3] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4395#section-5.4
> 
> 

--
Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Wednesday, 22 June 2011 23:55:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:15 UTC