Re: [Uri-review] scheme registration request

Hi Norm, 

Are you saying that my scheme definition fails to meet the requirements of section 3 in RFC7595?

Tim



> On 07/09/2022 12:02 PM Norm Tovey-Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> wrote:
> 
>  
> > 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

Received on Saturday, 9 July 2022 17:38:06 UTC