Thanks for the references Simon, you're right, a custom scheme may not be the best idea. I may have gotten over-enthousiastic because custom schemes are easy to implement within the Mozilla platform.
Assuming I'm right nonetheless on the fact that hijacking http through a proxy would be a bad idea, this would leave us with either tag: URIs or with URNs. Any suggestions on pros and cons ? Cheers, David On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 16:15 +0200, Yoric wrote: > On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 11:40 +0100, Simon McVittie wrote: > > "New URI Schemes: 99% Harmful" > > <http://infomesh.net/2001/09/urischemes> > > > > A specification SHOULD reuse an existing URI scheme (rather than create > > a new one) when it provides the desired properties of identifiers and > > their relation to resources. > > <http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#URI-scheme> > > > > If you're positive that you need a new URI scheme, please do it > > properly: consult <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2717.txt> and > > <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2718.txt> for details. > > > _______________________________________________ > Devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
