Re: [apps-discuss] Call for Adoption: draft-kerwin-file-scheme

[Graham Klyne <[e-mail]>]

On 01/01/2015 18:17, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
> Actually, my question was more general, and not specific to this particular
> document.  I'll rephrase:
>
> Can I take this to mean that, as wide adoption of a given a scheme (or
> media type, though I know that's not what you review) increases, your
> expectation of community discussion and possibly even RFC publication
> defining that scheme also increases?

Ah, thanks, I think I get your question now :)

Short answer: No (or not specifically).

Longer answer:

My reference to "adoption" as well as "consensus" is a recognition that, where 
there are non-standardized URI schemes out there in the wild which are widely 
used, and which are not otherwise controversial, it is probably appropriate per 
the "utility" requirement to include them in the permanent registry.

But I still have a preference for seeing RFC publication, or open standard 
publication, as that provides some evidence of "clear utility to the broad 
Internet community" [http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4395#section-2.1]  Absent 
that, I will look for, or ask for, other indicators, such as widespread adoption.

#g
--