private use schemes

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

private use schemes

Jeremy Carroll


A comment on
http://tools.ietf.org/html?draft=draft-hansen-2717bis-2718bis-uri-guidelines-07.txt

I note that a while ago Larry said:
[[
I wondered about allowing a free-for-all private use "x-" designation,
]]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/2005Feb/0045

I didn't see any discussion.
I think this is a good idea. There are cases where a protocol element,
or an API expects a URI, and within a single logical application made
by a single team of developers there is a need to pass a fairly
application specific identifier across this interface.

For this use, currently people invent their own scheme names from
anywhere in the scheme name space, encouraging them to do so from the
set "x-*" will avoid clashes with non-private use schemes being
developed elsewhere.

Jeremy



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: private use schemes

Windows-world
Thanks Jeremy for this interesting text ;).
Off course I think this is a good idea.