Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Why URI with list of schemes is a bad idea.

Expand Messages
  • Randy Morin
    I thought it would be appropriate for me to explain my resistance to using URI with a list schemes in place or URL. This is best served by example. Let s look
    Message 1 of 1 , Feb 16, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      I thought it would be appropriate for me to explain my resistance to
      using URI with a list schemes in place or URL. This is best served
      by example. Let's look at the source element, which has an attribute
      url. I think for starters everybody can agree that changing the name
      of the url attribute uri is a bad idea, as it would invalidate every
      existing RSS feed that uses the source element. But I don't expect
      any argument there. The argument is whether we should define that
      url attribute to be a URI with a list of acceptable schemes. For
      argument sake, let's say we allow http and https. Months go by and
      the community at large begins to adopt use of the feed scheme (ex.
      feed://feeds.feedburner.com/TheRSSBlog). Do we then modify the RSS
      specification to include this new scheme? Surely we would have to.
      On the other hand, if we said that the url attribute had to the a
      network addressable URI (or URL), then we don't have to modify the
      spec when new URIs come into popularity. This same argument applies
      to guid, comments and link elements. If we want to respect the
      wishes not to use the term URL in specifications, then I propose we
      adopt the following definitions.

      -source/@url is the network addressable URI
      -link is the URI of a Webpage
      -image/@url is the network addressable URI
      -image/@link is the URI of a Webpage
      -guid (with isPermaLink='true') is the URI of a Webpage
      -comments is the URI of a Webpage

      We can then have a section on URIs that explains what a URI is
      (points to the definition) and what is meant by Webpage and network
      addressable. Or we can just keep using URL. I hope this helps to
      clarify the argument.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.