- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 19:30:26 +0100
- To: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
- Cc: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com, www-tag@w3.org
On Wednesday, March 16, 2005, 7:10:13 PM, Larry wrote: LM> I'm not sure how much you're reading into the description. LM> The "access method" for "cid:" and "mid:" are well understood LM> outside of any particular context, it's only that the method LM> is only invokable in some contexts. I think they'd work inside LM> any number of contexts, though. LM> And the interpretation of "data:" doesn't depend at all LM> on the context. Yes, it doesn't depend on the context. It doesn't have a network protocol associated with it, either, which was why I suggested it as an example. LM> I think the text you're quoting was removed from the updated LM> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hansen-2717bis-2718bis-uri-guideli LM> nes-03.txt LM> and replaced with more general advice for "2.3 Well-Defined" LM> While URIs may or may not be useful as locators in practice, a URI LM> scheme definition itself should be clear as to how it is expected to LM> function. Schemes that are not intended to be used as locators LM> should still describe how the resource indicated can be identified by LM> software that obtains a URI of that scheme. LM> Larry -- Chris Lilley mailto:chris@w3.org Chair, W3C SVG Working Group W3C Graphics Activity Lead
Received on Wednesday, 16 March 2005 18:30:31 UTC