Lisa Dusseault wrote: > given those caveats and the lack of an official IESG or IETF > position on this
Dunno about the IESG, but I thought the IETF position is what BCP 115 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4395#section-2.1> says: "2.1 Demonstratable, New, Long-Lived Utility" [...] "New URI schemes SHOULD have clear utility to the broad Internet community, beyond that available with already registered URI schemes." Possibly held: and helds: (or is it heldref: and heldrefs: ?) are as they should be, but I didn't see this, and that's why I asked. Frank _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
