|
Re: Overuse of strings
Lauri Alanko
(24 Jan 2006 17:59 UTC)
|
|
Re: Overuse of strings
Per Bothner
(24 Jan 2006 19:51 UTC)
|
|
Re: Overuse of strings
Alan Bawden
(25 Jan 2006 00:44 UTC)
|
|
Re: Overuse of strings
Alex Shinn
(25 Jan 2006 01:39 UTC)
|
|
Re: Overuse of strings
Per Bothner
(25 Jan 2006 02:04 UTC)
|
|
Re: Overuse of strings
Alan Bawden
(25 Jan 2006 02:50 UTC)
|
|
Re: Overuse of strings
Lauri Alanko
(25 Jan 2006 18:19 UTC)
|
|
Re: Overuse of strings
Neil Van Dyke
(25 Jan 2006 19:07 UTC)
|
|
Re: Overuse of strings
bear
(25 Jan 2006 22:40 UTC)
|
|
Re: Overuse of strings
Lauri Alanko
(26 Jan 2006 07:35 UTC)
|
|
Re: Overuse of strings
Alex Shinn
(26 Jan 2006 01:37 UTC)
|
|
Re: Overuse of strings Neil Van Dyke (26 Jan 2006 02:03 UTC)
|
|
Re: Overuse of strings
Anton van Straaten
(26 Jan 2006 10:09 UTC)
|
|
Re: Overuse of strings
Lauri Alanko
(26 Jan 2006 10:25 UTC)
|
|
Re: Overuse of strings
Alex Shinn
(26 Jan 2006 02:17 UTC)
|
|
Re: Overuse of strings
Ray Blaak
(26 Jan 2006 06:56 UTC)
|
Re: Overuse of strings Neil Van Dyke 26 Jan 2006 02:03 UTC
Alex Shinn <xxxxxx@gmail.com> wrote at 2006-01-26T10:37:02+0900:
> On 1/26/06, Neil Van Dyke <xxxxxx@neilvandyke.org> wrote:
> > [...] I imagine that W3C- and IETF-types would have
> > comments wrt the authority component of the URI if the "scheme"
> > URI-scheme were proposed. I suspect some would question whether or not
> > a new URI-scheme is needed, which might beg other questions.
>
> The recommended approach would probably be to use a URN (rfc2141):
That's what I would've said, til I heard an offhand remark from one
person a while ago, which made me wonder whether URNs had fallen into
disfavour. I've not been in the loop on that lately. I definitely
think that some W3C and IETF people should be consulted about the use of
URIs in the Scheme module system, if they've not been already.
--
http://www.neilvandyke.org/