Re: [Uri-review] scheme registration request

> I am following the steps for a permanent registration in section 7.2
> of RFC7595 (Registration Procedures). I am on step 3 number(2). If you
> can't or won't answer my previous questions or pick a sub-section of
> Section 3 then your objections are not valid and you should not
> participate in this fact based discussion.

I think the point Julian was making was that RFC 3986, which describes
the generic syntax of URIs says, in part 3:

  URI = scheme ":" heir-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ]

Your scheme attempts to use “#” as the delimiter between the scheme name
“drop” and the scheme-specific-part.

That’s just not syntactically a URI. Irrespective of whatever merits
your proposed scheme may have, you can’t start there.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

--
Norman Tovey-Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
https://nwalsh.com/

> Time is a great teacher, but unfortunately it kills all its
> pupils.--Berlioz