Re: [Uri-review] Request for review of "ab:" URI scheme

[Barry Leiba <[e-mail]>]

>> 1. addrbook:personal
>> 2. addrbook:personal?name.contains=fred
>> 3. addrbook:personal?email=[e-mail]
>> 4. addrbook:personal?entry=314159265
>>
>> The first clearly provides a "whole book", a set of entries.  The
>> second is likely to give a set of entries, but the set could have
>> cardinality 1.  The third is likely to give a set of cardinality 1,
>> but it's possible for it to be > 1.  The fourth is specifying a single
>> entry by its unique ID.
>
> OK, so now I am getting nervous too. What you have just sketched out above
> is an address book access API. I think this goes way beyond the scope of
> what was needed in SIEVE. It crosses the boundaries of a whole bunch of
> other protocols: CardDAV, LDAP, the W3C contacts api etc. Some of those
> already have URIs that can encode query strings (LDAP) so why are we going
> to re-invent the wheel here?

Well, none of that is invented yet.  That's just an idea I had, and
it's not written anywhere but here.  If folks don't think it's useful
(or even that it's bad), well, we won't write an extension draft for
it.  :-)

Maybe the extension bits will be used for other things instead.

Barry