Re: HTML5 proposes introduction of new family of URI schemes

On 2012-01-18 16:31, Jonathan A Rees wrote:
> ...
> Maybe it does, but it doesn't answer my question - to what problem is
> this a solution? Also how is it expected to play out in practice? What
> will the new security dialogs look like and will they baffle users
> like all the others do? Has anyone already implemented it?
> The list of 'legacy schemes' is a red flag for me. By what criteria is
> inclusion in the list determined? Suppose the list needs to be
> changed, does that require a change to the HTML specification? What is
> it about 'mailto', really, that causes it to be treated differently
> from 'http'? The word 'core' doesn't explain much to me.
> A more conservative design would be to have a single new web: URI
> scheme with a subscheme registry (sort of link urn:), rather than lots
> of new URI schemes. This wouldn't allow registering behavior for
> mailto:, but might mean fewer surprises and less standards innovation.
> Not opposed, just confused. Someone has thought about this a lot, and
> I don't know what they've thought.
> ...

I agree with all you just said :-).

Best regards, Julian

Received on Wednesday, 18 January 2012 15:46:48 UTC