Yeah, URIs are actively hostile to customers. As a former lead engineer and
architect, I get their attractiveness, but they’re only friendly to software
engineers. This is one of the things IETF gets wrong over and over.
If certificates need to be readily available to everyone, we can’t
Ryan Sleevi via Public writes:
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 6:38 PM Tim Hollebeek
> wrote:
>
> > If certificates need to be readily available to everyone, we can’t force
> > arcana onto less sophisticated users. Remember, there’s plenty of evidence
> > showing that people adding CAA records often
On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 6:38 PM Tim Hollebeek
wrote:
> Yeah, URIs are actively hostile to customers. As a former lead engineer
> and architect, I get their attractiveness, but they’re only friendly to
> software engineers. This is one of the things IETF gets wrong over and
> over.
>
This is a
From: mailto://tim.holleb...@digicert.com
To: mailto://sle...@google.com
To make it clear, I don’t think turning things into URIs adds value for
customers. E-mail addresses usually AREN’T in the form of URIs, as noted above.
My position is easy to square given that I originally didn’t
Yeah, thanks for digging that up. I think it was a different reference I was
thinking of, but same conclusion. Making things complicated makes things
fail.
-Tim
> -Original Message-
> From: Seth David Schoen
> Sent: Wednesday, August 8, 2018 4:46 PM
> To: Ryan Sleevi ; CA/Browser
On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 10:30 PM Tim Hollebeek
wrote:
> From: mailto://tim.holleb...@digicert.com
>
> To: mailto://sle...@google.com
>
>
>
> To make it clear, I don’t think turning things into URIs adds value for
> customers. E-mail addresses usually AREN’T in the form of URIs, as noted
>
