Hi Stephen,
At 14:20 22-06-2012, Stephen Farrell wrote:
The issues raised but not so far obviously resolved on the
list were I think:
1) inclusion of content type
2) nih as a URI scheme or not
[snip]
For (2) we've left nih in as a URI scheme in this version.
We're still in favour of keeping it that way and have added
some language about why its there and is done like that. I'm
guessing that Martin at least won't be happy (but who knows;-),
so again comments are welcome as to whether the new text helps
or not. But in the end we'll go with Barry's consensus call
on this if he judges that we're in the rough, rather than the
folks who've commented on this topic. In that case I'll put
out a version with no nih scheme and the "human speakable"
format as just a textual convention (with a check-digit,
which'd be plain odd IMO, the uri scheme is the right idea
really:-)
I read Section 7 of draft-farrell-decade-ni-08. The justification
for a nih URI scheme elicits a smile. The idea is futuristic. :-) I
suggest having a version without the nih scheme.
Regards,
-sm