On 25.02.2010 11:54, Robin Berjon wrote:
Hi,
on behalf of the W3C WebApps Working Group I would like to request review for the
registration of the "widget" URI scheme.
The filled out registration template can be found at:
http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-uri/registration.txt
And the specification at:
http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-uri/
There is one specific aspect on which we would like to particularly solicit
your guidance. While the fact that implementations are shipping presently has
produced the need to define this URI scheme, we believe that we may update it
at a later date to take into account use cases not yet addressed by our
technology stack (the W3C Widgets family of specifications). As such, we would
like to know if it is best registered as provisional (the scheme is intended to
evolve) or permanent (the technology it is a part of is intended to become a
permanent part of the landscape). We are happy with either option, we mostly
ask because it is unclear to us from RFC4395 what the guiding principles should
be in electing one over the other.
Thanking you in advance for your review,
A few things that I stumbled upon on a quick read:
- The registration does not include a reference to the spec that
actually defines the URI scheme
- Neither the registration nor the spec actually define the syntax (I
couldn't see an ABNF...). You probably can re-use the grammar in RFC
3986, but you really should state that.
- It appears that the spec tries to define things in terms of IRIs; my
understanding is that what you need to define are URIs (plain ASCII, as
per RFC 3986), and then optionally include additional information about
how to map from/to IRIs.
Best regards, Julian
