XRIs *are* intended to be used where URIs are used

After just reading the TAG minutes from 2005-05-10, I am surprised by
the TAG conclusions with respect to our intent with  XRI and URIs.
 
Let me clarify that we absolutely do intend for  XRIs be usable where
URIs are called for - that is, we *do* intend that xri: be a URI scheme.
It is no coincidence that XRI 2.0 comes on the heels of RFC 3986 and
3987 - we spent considerable effort aligning XRI with the spirit and
letter of those RFCs. 
 
Section 2.2 (lines 300-306) of XRI Syntax [1] states:
 
XRI syntax builds on generic IRI (and ultimately, URI) syntax. However
because XRI syntax includes syntactic elements other than those defined
in [IRI] and [URI], this specification defines a new protocol element,
"XRI", along with rules for transforming XRI references into generic IRI
or URI references for applications that expect them (see section 2.3.1,
"Transforming XRI References into IRI and URI References"). An XRI
reference MUST be constructed such that it qualifies as a valid IRI as
defined by [IRI] when converted to IRI-normal form and such that it
qualifies as a valid URI as defined by [URI] when converted to
URI-normal form. 
 
The transformations for XRI-normal form to IRI-normal form and
URI-normal form are discussed in section 2.3.1 of the XRI Syntax
document.
 
We haven't registered the xri: scheme because the XRI specification has
not yet been voted on by the OASIS membership. We are trying to be
careful to state that XRI is not (yet) a URI scheme - but that is
because we have to adopt the specification in the home standards body
(OASIS) before we can take it to another standards body for official
registration as a URI scheme. 
 
    -Gabe
 
[1]
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/11852/xri-syntax-v2.0-
cd-01.pdf
__________________________________________________ 
gwachob@visa.com 
Chief Systems Architect 
Technology Strategies and Standards 
Visa International 
Phone: +1.650.432.3696   Fax: +1.650.554.6817