- From: Timothy Mcsweeney <tim@dropnumber.com>
- Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2022 10:59:55 -0400 (EDT)
- To: Paul Prescod <paul@prescod.net>
- Cc: "Daniel R. Tobias" <dan@tobias.name>, Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, "url@w3.org" <url@w3.org>, "uri-request@w3.org" <uri-request@w3.org>
Hi Paul, That was answered on the ietf list and that doesn't pertain to RFC7595 Tim > On 07/09/2022 10:57 PM Paul Prescod <paul@prescod.net> wrote: > > > I feel that you did not answer Sylvia’s more interesting question. > > Given that IETF standards are defined by the consensus of technologists, > and given that the consensus is strong that the use of the hash symbol is > incorrect, why do you insist on it? > > On Sat, Jul 9, 2022 at 10:08 PM Timothy Mcsweeney <tim@dropnumber.com> > wrote: > > > > > Hi Silvia, > > > > > On 07/09/2022 7:55 PM Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Also, have you tried to implement an example use of your scheme? > > > > I have. At one point a couple years ago I ran into a snag and had to ask > > for help. I plan on sharing what I have with the people who were kind > > enough to give me some advice. You can see who they are in the thread > > here.[1] > > > > Tim > > > > [1] > > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/uri-review/fNYc3Hk8sjam0Oq4WzaM7HYTdvY/ > > > >
Received on Sunday, 10 July 2022 15:00:15 UTC