Registration of acct: as a URI scheme has been requested

I think the TAG should look at this.  It raises the general question
of the architectural appropriateness of URI schemes intended only for
use internally within a particular protocol.  As I understand it acct:
URIs have no meaning outside messages in the proposed webfinger


Forwarded message 1

  • From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <>
  • Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 07:51:54 +0200
  • Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] FW: I-D Action: draft-jones-appsawg-webfinger-06.txt
  • To: "Paul E. Jones" <>
  • Cc:
  • Message-ID: <>
* Paul E. Jones wrote:
>I have also sent a request to the email address specified for URI scheme
>review to try to move registration of "acct" along.  I hope that will not
>take long, and I would hope it would not considering the specific and narrow
>scope of "acct". if
anyone wants to follow along.
Björn Höhrmann · ·
Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 ·
25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · 
apps-discuss mailing list
       Henry S. Thompson, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh
      10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
                Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail:
 [mail from me _always_ has a .sig like this -- mail without it is forged spam]

Received on Wednesday, 20 June 2012 15:50:02 UTC