Re: [Uri-review] Initial inquiry into URI proposal (nym)
DataPacRat <datapacrat@gmail.com> Fri, 21 June 2013 22:58 UTC
Return-Path: <datapacrat@gmail.com>
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 8522221F9D78 for <uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 15:58:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.554
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.554 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.409, BAYES_00=-2.599, FRT_ADOBE2=2.455, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
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 7N9gyfbfu+AJ for <uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 15:58:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x22a.google.com (mail-wi0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::22a]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6D6A21F9D73 for <uri-review@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 15:58:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wi0-f170.google.com with SMTP id ey16so1157364wid.5 for <uri-review@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 15:58:30 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=7R0RQDfoMZZqgKcd2VzlwHdgrMjYxhqI4V4qNE4ga4Y=; b=QZdys5mIQ6qhrVg3JsxW5x60hLRHw5pqXn/lM0PA8yP0XJw+C08YbdrHSq+M0xe30N SFi4A698a/c91gkiQMi2duMkHrdNlPBUnXAlT5rc7aqt3476aAD+M/FIWPMQUPWxHJvx Pi/HcjIx5kpvpDq+vLYD/E2HUEBBEx0fFHoEV+IzX2f202Ufrz8rVeeY5sf4y0e3rZa6 sQJXc9O1sF4PzSsaG67GMxiE+PUux7ZFOqv5HgKo45HYKzjRHGGZDGC2Aio0aSpYNJO6 MUJL/Rgrfowp+5hPuQWdTWfqE805UGCrBq4csR4DOiWCEYXyvL097tw49ZPd/RcKuy51 Htqw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.47.167 with SMTP id e7mr10174616wjn.57.1371855510837; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 15:58:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.243.193 with HTTP; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 15:58:30 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <C68CB012D9182D408CED7B884F441D4D347221DC55@nambxv01a.corp.adobe.com>
References: <CAB5WduCMF+HMyHPFU1bJkOcbzpyAM063XvCM-uDn2zGAoZkFEg@mail.gmail.com> <C68CB012D9182D408CED7B884F441D4D3471E4101A@nambxv01a.corp.adobe.com> <CAB5WduCz4nRSeMUVKnjmUNEDxzRB54khCiU2-1sqCYr1TKLSFA@mail.gmail.com> <CAB5WduAmmMkwBs5fU4Nzz1S8mTqn_oBp+7j0APSOib51OVSdTA@mail.gmail.com> <C68CB012D9182D408CED7B884F441D4D347221DBE6@nambxv01a.corp.adobe.com> <CAB5WduBfMNnTx1sj2C14vkZRJ+9bibxY=Ee4c6K0KwJF4FQpuw@mail.gmail.com> <C68CB012D9182D408CED7B884F441D4D347221DC55@nambxv01a.corp.adobe.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 18:58:30 -0400
Message-ID: <CAB5WduAWR+cxuMDfCsrs1az19=0gX10sbnkqSKnifePgD4=4Lg@mail.gmail.com>
From: DataPacRat <datapacrat@gmail.com>
To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Cc: "uri-review@ietf.org" <uri-review@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Uri-review] Initial inquiry into URI proposal (nym)
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: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 22:58:32 -0000
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 6:44 PM, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com> wrote: > http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/metaDataInURI-31.html > is a good start. Having read that page, I'm not quite sure which part of it is supposed to apply directly to nym. As a first stab, I'm going to guess that you're unhappy with the way nym's current draft marks out the confidence-level field, and other optional comments. Would your opinion of nym improve if I dropped the comments fields entirely (other than the confidence field); or if I used different characters than ? and & to mark them off? Thank you for your time, -- DataPacRat "Then again, I could be wrong."
- [Uri-review] Initial inquiry into URI proposal (n… DataPacRat
- Re: [Uri-review] Initial inquiry into URI proposa… Larry Masinter
- Re: [Uri-review] Initial inquiry into URI proposa… DataPacRat
- Re: [Uri-review] Initial inquiry into URI proposa… DataPacRat
- Re: [Uri-review] Initial inquiry into URI proposa… Larry Masinter
- Re: [Uri-review] Initial inquiry into URI proposa… DataPacRat
- Re: [Uri-review] Initial inquiry into URI proposa… Larry Masinter
- Re: [Uri-review] Initial inquiry into URI proposa… DataPacRat
- Re: [Uri-review] Initial inquiry into URI proposa… DataPacRat
- Re: [Uri-review] Initial inquiry into URI proposa… Graham Klyne
- Re: [Uri-review] Initial inquiry into URI proposa… DataPacRat
- Re: [Uri-review] Initial inquiry into URI proposa… Graham Klyne
- Re: [Uri-review] Initial inquiry into URI proposa… DataPacRat
- Re: [Uri-review] Initial inquiry into URI proposa… David Booth
- Re: [Uri-review] Initial inquiry into URI proposa… Michael Wojcik
- Re: [Uri-review] Initial inquiry into URI proposa… DataPacRat
- Re: [Uri-review] Initial inquiry into URI proposa… DataPacRat
- Re: [Uri-review] Initial inquiry into URI proposa… Eric Johnson
- Re: [Uri-review] Initial inquiry into URI proposa… David Booth
- Re: [Uri-review] Initial inquiry into URI proposa… DataPacRat
- Re: [Uri-review] Initial inquiry into URI proposa… Eric Johnson