RE: [schemeProtocols-49] New draft of proposed "URI Schemes and Web Protocols" Finding

Larry Masinter writes:

> I would really like it if you would no longer cite RFCs 2717 and 
> 2718 but their replacement, in particular because the process and 
> guidelines have changed significantly.

Sure.  You probably saw that I already had the reference to the 
replacement as well, and I didn't realize it was appropriate to make the 
switch formal until the new RFC actually "shipped".  Do we know its number 
yet?  In any case, I'm more than glad to make the reference in whatever 
way you prefer.

> Since you're trying to be careful to discern between resource and 
> method of identification, I'm not particularly happy with the 
> presumption behind some of your wording.

> For example, you have a section head  "Scenario: Accessing http 
> resources using a peer-to-peer protocol" 

> But I don't think it is appropriate to call the resource "a http 
> resource". While it's fine to use informally, if you're trying to 
> distinguish between "the category of the resource itself" and "the 
> scheme used to identify the resource" and "the protocol used to 
> access the resource", the simple phrase "http resource" doesn't 
> explain which of those levels you're really talking about.

Hmm.  My Terminology section says:

"This finding frequently refers to the set resources named by URIs from a 
particular scheme such as http. For brevity, such resources are 
collectively referenced by their schemes. The resources named by 
http://example.org/res1 and http://example.org/res2 are thus both referred 
to as 'http resources'."

So, I wasn't trying to be informal.  I was using an abbreviation that I 
had attempted to carefully define before use.  Thus scenario title should 
be interpreted as:

"Scenario: Accessing resources with URI names in the http scheme using a 
peer-to-peer protocol" 

This comes up sufficiently often that I found it useful to have the 
convention.  Please clarify whether you noticed the definition and didn't 
like it, or whether perhaps your concern is eased by me pointing it out. 

Many thanks.

Noah

--------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn 
IBM Corporation
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
1-617-693-4036
--------------------------------------

Received on Wednesday, 30 November 2005 03:02:10 UTC