RE: URI for XML schema and namespace

[Chris Newman <[e-mail]>]

As Applications Area Director, I'm not aware of anyone ever asking for that.

I'm holding a discuss position on:
   draft-narten-iana-considerations-rfc2434bis-08
because the present text forbids use of IANA URLs and I consider that an 
unacceptable new restriction for IANA considerations.

Current IETF practice discourages use of IANA URLs in IETF specifications. 
However, we have one case, RFC 4790, where stable iana.org http URLs are 
provided to registry elements and that was done with IANA's permission.  In 
that case, the registry was created to be useful to both the IETF and the W3C. 
The stable http URLs make the W3C happier so it was worth doing that way.

I would support a similar approach for iana.org http XML namespaces if someone 
spent the time to write up the rules and get IANA's consent.

Using an ietf.org http URIs for XML namespaces is a bad idea.  The IETF has 
deliberately kept the registry function for our standards separate and I 
consider that a feature.  Also, ietf.org is operated by the Secretariat 
function so using that domain for registrations would require additional (and 
more expensive) coordination than iana.org.  It _might_ be feasible to set up a 
redirect from ietf.org to iana.org for XML namespaces, but I worry that's just 
one additional level of complexity where things could break (especially if we 
transition the secretariat function between vendors periodically as we're in 
the process of doing now).

To summarize the options:
1. URNs for XML namespaces -- present IETF common practice
2. non-IETF http URLs for XML namespaces -- acceptable
3. iana.org http URLs for XML namespaces -- nobody has tried this, seems 
feasible to me.
4. ietf.org http URLs for XML namespaces -- nobody has tried this.  I think 
it's a bad idea.

                - Chris

David Harrington wrote on 1/4/08 11:47 -0500:

> Hi Julian,
>
> That's an interesting observation, but it didn't answer my question.
> Has anybody explicitly asked the people who can create such a
> permanent web site to do so?
> Has anybody fashioned an explicit proposal for the establishment of
> permanent IETF URIs?
>
> Am I off-target with my question?
> Would this simply be a bad idea?
> If it is a good idea, who wants it badly enough to write such a
> proposal?
>
> David Harrington
> [e-mail]
> [e-mail]
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Julian Reschke [mailto:[e-mail]]
>> Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 11:24 AM
>> To: David Harrington
>> Cc: 'Scott Hollenbeck'; 'Apps Discuss'
>> Subject: Re: URI for XML schema and namespace
>>
>> David Harrington wrote:
>> > Has anybody actually asked Ray to get such a  permanent
>> part of IETF's
>> > own web space allocated and setup? Would entries on the web site
>> > require IANA assignment, e.g. as a registry?
>> >
>> > I'm asking because I am new to the discussion, and simply don't
> know
>> > the answer.
>> >
>> > dbh
>>
>> I think historically there's a lot of reluctance inside IANA (or the
>
>> whole IESG) to consider any URI starting with "http" as permanent.
>>
>> BR, Julian
>>
>
>
>
>
>