Re: Registration of acct: as a URI scheme has been requested

On 20 June 2012 17:49, Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk> wrote:

> 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
> protocol.
>

For reference, here is the full text of the URI Scheme part of the
webfinger RFC

6. The "acct" URI

   The "acct" URI takes a familiar form in looking like an email
   address.  However, the account URI is not an email address and should
   not be mistaken for one.  Quite often, the account URI minus the
   "acct:" scheme prefix may be exactly the same as the user's email
   address.

   The "acct" URI syntax is defined here in Augmented Backus-Naur Form
   (ABNF) [7] and borrows syntax elements from RFC 3986 [6]:

       acctURI      =  "acct:" userpart "@" domainpart
       userpart     =  1*( unreserved / pct-encoded )
       domainpart   =  domainlabel 1*( "." domainlabel)
       domainlabel  =  alphanum / alphanum *( alphanum / "-" ) alphanum
       alphanum     =  ALPHA / DIGIT

   The "acct" URI scheme allows any character from the Unicode [12]
   character set encoded as a UTF-8 [20] string that is then percent-
   encoded as necessary into valid ASCII [21].  Characters in the
   domainpart must be encoded to support internationalized domain names
   (IDNs) [13].

   Characters in the userpart or domainpart that are not unreserved must
   be percent-encoded when used in a protocol or document that only
   supports or requires ASCII.  When carried in a document (e.g., XRD or
   JRD) or protocol that supports the Unicode character set (e.g., UTF-8
   or UTF-16 [22]), the URI strings may appear in the protocol or
   document's native encoding without percent-encoding.  Such usage of a
   URI is commonly referred to as an Internationalized Resource
   Identifier (IRI).  Conversion between an IRI and URI is described in
   Section 3 of RFC 3987 [14].




>
> ht
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
> To: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>
> Cc: apps-discuss@ietf.org
> Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 07:51:54 +0200
> Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] FW: I-D Action:
> draft-jones-appsawg-webfinger-06.txt
> * 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".
>
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/uri-review/current/msg01605.html if
> anyone wants to follow along.
> --
> Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
> Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
> 25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/
> _______________________________________________
> apps-discuss mailing list
> apps-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>       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: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
>                       URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
>  [mail from me _always_ has a .sig like this -- mail without it is forged
> spam]
>
>