RE: Appeal from Tim McSweeney regarding draft-mcsweeney-drop-scheme

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Getting some uniformity of process around web extension points would be
helpful. You've done a lot to simplify submission, why not for schemes.
I don't think it's necessary to remove old provisional schemes, but it
should be possible for someone else to claim use .

 The thing that we wanted to avoid was  scheme-squatting, and fighting over
who gets to use pizza:  or food: or amazon: 
This is a risk in RegisterProtocolHandler  That kind of judgement was part
of the reaction to the drop scheme.
Such a common word, 'drop' but he couldn't change it because he was already
using the word in dropnumber.com.

I don't know how to solve this problem; there are too many constraints. 

I blame RegisterProtocolHandler because before it was really hard to deploy
a new scheme, so it wouldn't matter who owned pizza: 





[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux