Lists Home |
Date Index |
Mike Champion wrote:
> So. I'm now asking if we should create a URI scheme with these
In general, we should not create URI schemes unless the benefit of doing
so is very high, because the cost is very (amazingly, remarkably) high.
The number of instances of software in the world that are expected to
be able to process URIs is very high. Correct processing of a URI is
dependent on its scheme. Thus introduction of new schemes carries an
insanely high cost.
Unless you don't want it processed. Which seems frankly nuts to me,
people are talking about resources that they don't representations of to
be available, and I JUST DON'T GET why this is supposed to be a good
idea ("I promise never to tell you anything about this resource!"
!?!?!?), but anyhow, suppose you want this, just make a new URN family,
there's even a formal registration procedure.