Submit TV-URI work to IESG ? (was: Re: "lid" URLs)

Dan,

i think that at least the "tv:" scheme seems to be ready to be
forwarded to the IESG for adoption - what do you think ? There
was not much discussion last time you did an update, so maybe it's
time to wrap this up.

-Philipp

Dan Zigmond a écrit :
> 
> Agreed.  We were a little careless in our terminology (as others also
> pointed out), and I just haven't gotten around to revising the drafts.
> 
>         Dan
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------
> Dan Zigmond
> Senior Group Manager, Client Technologies
> WebTV Networks, Inc.
> djz@corp.webtv.net
> ---------------------------------------------------
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Larry Masinter [mailto:LM@att.com]
> Sent: Saturday, April 15, 2000 10:33 AM
> To: uri@w3.org; www-tv@w3.org
> Subject: "lid" URLs
> 
> (someone) wrote me:
> 
> > I've just noticed a couple of Internet drafts that propose and refer to a
> > URI scheme called lid:
> >
> >    draft-blackketter-lid-00.txt
> >    draft-finseth-isanlid-00.txt
> >
> > I have two thoughts:
> >
> > (a) these lid:'s look more like URNs to me
> >
> > (b) the lid draft claims that lid:'s are simulatneously URIs and URNs, but
> > they don't conform to URN syntax (in not having a leading "urn:" or
> > namespace identifier parts).
> 
> I don't have a problem with URL-schemes that have URN-like semantics,
> since there are enough of them already (cid, news, etc.). I think the
> wording (saying that lid URLs are URNs) probably needs to change, since
> it just adds confusion.
> 
> Larry

Received on Wednesday, 19 April 2000 06:09:33 UTC