> On 08/30/2022 10:11 PM EDT Larry Masinter <lmm@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > TL;DR proposal: register drop# as requested (with a note added); then maybe > we can drop#it. > > A "URI scheme" is kind of like a domain name from the following perspective: > > If you own the top-level domain "pizza" then you have the right to hand out > names like "joes.pizza" and "best.pizza" and "tasty.pizza". These domain > names are valuable and you have to pay big bucks to be able to own that > right. Not too long ago there was a big flap over the sale of ".org" to a > private equity group for an ungodly amount. From the point of view of > imagining how most people in the world think about these things, "http" > and ".org" are "drop" (in drop#something) are kind of the same kind of > thing. > > > Now, if you own a URI (or if you like, URL) scheme, like "pizza" (or > "drop") you might think this gives you the right to hand or manage or > control names starting with those, like "pizza:joes or pizza:best", or > "drop:everything" or "drop:number" or "drop:dead". > That is, the resource identified was the abstraction, with representations > of abstractions imply an implicit MIME type with fragment identifiers > naming the actual concept identified. > > You might even establish a convention that the "drop" URI scheme supports a > null body so that "drop:" by itself identified "the world of drop numbers" > and the particular semantics of "the world of drop numbers" was instead > typically identified by the fragment identifier, so that > "drop:#best%20pizza" would turn out to identify the source of the best > pizza (at least as designated by the owner of the "drop" scheme). > > You might even want to build and deploy a set of clients and utilities that > had the convention that a URI without a host or path but with a fragment > identifier could be transmitted and understood that the intervening > punctuation can be elided, allowing usages such as "drop#pizza", > "drop#everything" or even "drop#dead". > > You might even plan to offer a service (as RealNames and others [1] did) > using the Common Name Resolution Protocol [2] (or an alternative meeting > the same goals [3]). Perhaps you could use an existing registered but > unused scheme (e.g. "go" [4]) or register a new one (say "drop"). > > The syntax of URIs / URLs is not settled; the IETF has RFC 3986[5], WHATWG > has the URL Living Standard[6], with mare more candidates for a definitive > specification [7] (message received TODAY!).. Pleas to address the > situation [8][9] or even consistent implementation in browsers have largely > gone unheeded [10]. But the one thing that is worse than having two > incompatible specs for the "same" thing (if they are) is having three. > > URI/URL scheme registration procedures and guidelines have changed over > time, mainly ignoring the reality that there is little impact in this world > in having your scheme registered. > What matters is what you can get implementors to implement or delegate if > you have the right apps installed on your phone or pad or desktop. There > are tons of unimplemented schemes in the IANA registry[11] and tons of > implemented schemes with no registration. Wikipedia[12] is a better > source. > > Meanwhile, through BCP 35 RFC 4395, RFC 6085, RFC 8615, RFC 7595 and > others, we've spent a lot of thought on guidelines and processes that don't > seem to matter.. In retrospect, the differences between "in use" and > "registered" weren't due to problems addressed. Provisional registrations > based on theory without practice are relatively harmless. If you register > schemes such as RFC 2324 (which defined the scheme for > "%E3%82%B3%E3%83%BC%E3%83%92%E3%83%BC") the internet doesn't care -- > perhaps in future we might use ☕ 😋:. > > [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/cnrp/ > [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc3367/ > [3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc2972/ > [4] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc3368 > [5] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc3986 > [6] https://url.spec.whatwg.org/ > [7] https://github.com/whatwg/url/issues/479#issuecomment-1231491543 > [8] https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2017/01/30/one-url-standard-please/ > [9] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ruby-url-problem-01 > [10] https://twitter.com/samruby/status/1547646895027146753 > [11] https://www.iana.org/assignments/uri-schemes/uri-schemes.xhtml > [12] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_URI_schemes > -- > https://LarryMasinter.net https://interlisp.org And it gets rid of spam and robo calls.
