  Re: URI scheme uniqueness  From: Elias Sinderson
<elias@cse.ucsc.edu> Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 10:47:27 -0700
Message-ID: <3F2E9C2F.1030307@cse.ucsc.edu> To: w3c-dist-
auth@w3.org >><Elias Sinderson> Perhaps something along the
lines of the following would be acceptable? >>"...are free to
use any URI scheme so long as it meets the stated uniqueness
>>requirements. One way to accomplish this is to use IETF-
registered URI schemes." ><Julian Reschke> That's plain and
simply wrong. The only way is to use an URI scheme that >*both*
is IETF-registered and meets the uniqueness criterium. <Elias
Sinderson> Goodness, you are correct, mea culpa - I see your
point now.  >><Elias Sinderson> This language seems specific
enough to be unambiguous while flexible enough to allow for
other mechanisms to ensure uniqueness. The drawback of not [...]
><Julian Reschke> See, this kind of proves that the spec needs
to be enhanced. You and others seem to read it as a license to
come up with "private" URI schemes, which is plainly wro