Re: [Uri-review] ssh URI

While I applaud the basic sentiment of not having this discussion
every time a new URI scheme comes up, I think you'd have to persuade
the IETF rather than the TAG.  The IETF is responsible for URI
registration, and the documents are pretty clear on that point.  The
IESG and IAB take the TAG's input very seriously, of course, but the
question of URI registration is one where there has been divergence
for some time.  As the discussion above notes, having HTTP always in
the URI loop may make sense for the web; it doesn't work for other
deployments and other protocols.

I personally agree with those saying ssh ought to be an independent
scheme.  It has a widely installed user base and I have seen
individuals use ssh:hostname as a pseudo-URI for some time.  Pushing
out a real spec for the URI scheme would avoid interoperability
problems there, and that in itself is goodness.

2 cents from:

Ted Hardie

On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 12:44 AM, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org> wrote:
> [snip]
>
> David,
>
> Can I suggest a new workflow for these ideas?
>
> Instead of intervening when every new URI scheme proposal comes
> through these lists, perhaps you could work to persuade the W3C TAG of
> them instead? I think I understand where you're coming from, but the
> approach is pretty alien to URIs as currently deployed, particularly
> with regard to browser infrastructure, which at the moment is
> universally keyed off of the scheme prefix and unlikely to change
> rapidly due to the huge security implications.
>
> There might be something in these ideas (though I remain generally
> skeptical when it comes to protocols - such as ssh - rather than
> content/object identifiers eg. doi, xri, ...). At the moment they're
> being discussed in an ad hoc way whenever someone proposes a new
> scheme. Could it be more efficient to propose and refine them through
> the TAG, perhaps?
>
> cheers,
>
> Dan
> _______________________________________________
> Uri-review mailing list
> Uri-review@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uri-review
>