Re: URI scheme best practices

Hi Bob,

The IRI working group of IETF is now working on 4395bis, an the WG is 
considering the questions whether to leave or not the provisions you 
were guided by.  That was me who raised that issue, and my justification 
is that there was no evidence of any attempts to register the scheme 
like you're proposing.  So, I'd like you didn't consider such provisions 
as current practices, since there has been no practice at all with this 

Mykyta Yevstifeyev

07.10.2011 19:07, Bob Van Zant wrote:
> Hello everyone,
> I've been reading through RFC 4395 and some of the mailing list
> archives. We're working on iOS and Android apps that we'd like to have
> be able to respond to URIs in the mail applications of each of those
> devices. For example, if we generate a password reset email and send
> it to the user and they click on that link in their mail application
> we'd like that to fire up our app instead of the web browser.
> I recognize that this is a fairly standard thing to do and in reading
> through what must be a somewhat memorable thread (fb: URIs?
> I see that
> this has been beaten around a bit.
> Based on the fb: URIs thread I get the feeling that people wish we
> could register with iOS and Android to have our app handle URIs of the
> form I'm pretty sure that
> this is not possible?
> Given that we don't think we can use http and given RFC 4395 we're
> planning to use a scheme com-eventbrite-attendee: and generate URIs
> like com-eventbrite-attendee:resetpassword?parameters&go&here
> Is this the current best practice? Is the intent of 4395 that we
> attempt registration of the scheme com-eventbrite-attendee:? I'm happy
> to go through the process described in section 5 of 4395 but the
> extremely tiny URI scheme registration list almost makes me think that
> IANA doesn't want us in there.
> Thanks,
> Bob

Received on Saturday, 8 October 2011 14:03:20 UTC