IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Uri-review] Review Provisional registration for app URI scheme

Stian Soiland-Reyes <stain@apache.org> Wed, 17 January 2018 16:43 UTC

Return-Path: <stain@apache.org>
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 BE91D12D7F0 for <uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Jan 2018 08:43:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.93
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.93 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, ENV_AND_HDR_SPF_MATCH=-0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id F-GKeun2PRPn for <uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Jan 2018 08:43:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 1AC9A13149B for <uri-review@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Jan 2018 08:42:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 66251 invoked by uid 99); 17 Jan 2018 16:42:49 -0000
Received: from mail-relay.apache.org (HELO mail-relay.apache.org) (140.211.11.15) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 17 Jan 2018 16:42:49 +0000
Received: from mail-ua0-f176.google.com (mail-ua0-f176.google.com [209.85.217.176]) by mail-relay.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mail-relay.apache.org) with ESMTPSA id 193791A0117 for <uri-review@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Jan 2018 16:42:48 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-ua0-f176.google.com with SMTP id x16so13595258uaj.11 for <uri-review@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Jan 2018 08:42:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Gm-Message-State: AKwxytdoFU0thw1Q1Igxi5VWVP2LYD6VHPcQrTI5vFa0RMnqhk6GSj6Z m/PQVzSV0FmHE2IPrMTUhd6YgP7EsQ0AQ1rdfcWYeA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBos4btEWtDnk/wzDvLZx2tZAldb2wi6o62Spuw/bsHfH+Wur1vJ6eLIXgCftlMoxIO9r3HjrwZ3NjcDrxs6Z8n8=
X-Received: by 10.176.20.129 with SMTP id d1mr2275749uae.121.1516207365307; Wed, 17 Jan 2018 08:42:45 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.159.37.172 with HTTP; Wed, 17 Jan 2018 08:42:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Originating-IP: [84.92.48.26]
In-Reply-To: <4d910f73-9ca4-c661-0ff1-f508b8ccbed2@gmx.de>
References: <20180117144647.GC5245@biggie> <4d910f73-9ca4-c661-0ff1-f508b8ccbed2@gmx.de>
From: Stian Soiland-Reyes <stain@apache.org>
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 16:42:24 +0000
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAMBJEmV=5SXYUvGag4nRK3ZcRFFKo22pXHrfWz13wFJ1TDdVAg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAMBJEmV=5SXYUvGag4nRK3ZcRFFKo22pXHrfWz13wFJ1TDdVAg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: uri-review@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/uri-review/ExkkEK4HbXDKYqIk-NtdCAkmHDU>
Subject: Re: [Uri-review] Review Provisional registration for app URI scheme
X-BeenThere: uri-review@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 16:43:10 -0000

On 17 January 2018 at 16:15, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:

> ...FWIW, the name "app" IMHO is very very misleading. Maybe you could
> consider something that more reflects what's being identified by the URIs?

Yes, ideally a name like "archive" would be more general and appropriate.

I addressed that in
https://rawgit.com/stain/I-D/master/app/app.html#rfc.appendix.B as I
preferred to keep it backwards compatible with the previous W3C
attempt of app URI scheme.

Here's how we used "app" in 2014 - perhaps prematurely we could say now:
https://w3id.org/bundle/#absolute-uris


I consulted with the original author who agrees the W3C Note is
abandoned - but he suggested not to register "app" as Historical to
leave the door open for others.
https://github.com/sysapps/app-uri/issues/44


-- 
Stian Soiland-Reyes
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email