IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Uri-review] Request for review

Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net> Tue, 23 August 2011 22:06 UTC

Return-Path: <derhoermi@gmx.net>
X-Original-To: uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B514221F8C0A for <uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 15:06:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.327
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.327 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.728, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FXUpRWaBHuMB for <uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 15:06:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 9923921F8BE4 for <uri-review@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 15:06:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 23 Aug 2011 22:07:29 -0000
Received: from dslb-094-223-189-049.pools.arcor-ip.net (EHLO HIVE) [94.223.189.49] by mail.gmx.net (mp046) with SMTP; 24 Aug 2011 00:07:29 +0200
X-Authenticated: #723575
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18FJikotEkFNmMGcEjcKA8ZeaEoRlYhZ7zk1AUQbt vvCUybX8oFUER2
From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
To: Frank Ellermann <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 00:07:43 +0200
Message-ID: <34985718tgauffj7frmac33a5q5htssi3l@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>
References: <CAHhFybrZJC8res4BKkAcPtiCByFzygCyW4KSzkHu9Kzs+h+isA@mail.gmail.com> <ndj757dljhmfj4b7eku5n2a1p4g7lph3ku@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de> <CAHhFybrtB1kVv1hofQSLxeFv5fMGDcaRYn-_PhtHCp-TEPRKgg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHhFybrtB1kVv1hofQSLxeFv5fMGDcaRYn-_PhtHCp-TEPRKgg@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
Cc: uri-review@ietf.org, uri@w3.org
Subject: Re: [Uri-review] Request for review
X-BeenThere: uri-review@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proposed URI Schemes <uri-review.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/uri-review>, <mailto:uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/uri-review>
List-Post: <mailto:uri-review@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uri-review>, <mailto:uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 22:06:23 -0000

* Frank Ellermann wrote:
>A registration template isn't a good place to discuss problems caused by
>non-URIs interpreted as URIs.  VU#358018 had nothing to do with "pack:",
>it is an example that problems with broken URIs are not only theoretical.
>I suggest to remove that example instead of elaborating it, see below.

(Removing the reference removes my concern about it.)
-- 
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/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email