Re: URI resolver was Re: RDDL and XML Schemas Proposed Recommendation

[Michael Mealling <michael@bailey.dscga.com>]

On Mon, Mar 26, 2001 at 12:33:26AM +1000, Justin Couch wrote:
> Michael Mealling wrote:
> > > Firstly, your end user application has to know how to deal with generic
> > > URIs. As I mentioned above, a typical web browser does not allow
> > > plugging in of generic URI resolver DLLs.
> > 
> > Actually IE does. But it means you have to insert yourself in between
> > IE and its URI plugin interface which means you have to duplicate
> > everything Microsoft is doing. It isn't trivial. ;-)
> 
> Well I stand corrected for one browser. However, Mear Mortels(TM) will
> have problems dealing with this and it is not a generalised solution for
> all applications running on an MS platform I suspect. I remember the old
> plugin work you'd done but when I last looked at the pages a few months
> ago the dates were still back in 1999. Consequently I'd written them off
> as being no longer available.

Its being re-released toward the end of May. Complete re-write by
someone who actually knows Windows programming. Its even thread safe!
I'll announce it all over the place when we're done...

> > As a point of information: this entire space is something that the
> > W3C URI Interest Group is looking at as an area of joint work with
> > the IETF. The goal is to look at standardizing some vocabularies and
> > services more concretely so that its easier to describe the entire
> > space as a single infrastructure service. I think our deadline is
> > the end of next month so you should be seeing something shortly....
> 
> Well, that's news to me. I'm on all three lists and haven't heard a peep
> from either for a month or more. xml-uri has basically turned into a
> haven for spammers over the last couple of months. The W3C list hasn't
> faired much better either. Would be nice if the powers that be actually
> bothered to inform the user community that something was being done. I
> would certainly be involved, but I've never heard a thing. I've been
> floating around URI/URN land for about 3 years now and never once heard
> mention about this.

Its a W3C group in the Architecture domain so its a closed list. 
The groups job is to identify those things that the W3C and the IETF
should work on to make URIs more 'sane'. Most of this is clarifying
existing documentation like the fact that RFC 2717 defines the
registration process for new schemes and that RFC 2396 is the correct
URI standard (instead of the ancient 1738). Our report deadline is
the end of next month...

-MM

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Mealling	|      Vote Libertarian!       | www.rwhois.net/michael
Sr. Research Engineer   |   www.ga.lp.org/gwinnett     | ICQ#:         14198821
Network Solutions	|          www.lp.org          |  michaelm@netsol.com