Unofficial but common URI schemes

[Dave Thaler]

In a previous meeting I believe we agreed that we should encourage third-party
registrations of URI schemes that the owners didn't register. And indeed we
updated the language (e.g. around security considerations) to clarify how to do so.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/URI_scheme lists 71 unregistered URI schemes in
the "Unofficial but common URI schemes". So it seems the right thing to do is
to try to follow the 4395bis process for all 71 of them.

Not doing so would mean, IMO, we'd basically be leaving Wikipedia to be the
unofficial registry that people will actually use (and check for uniqueness when
submitting registrations) instead of the IANA registry.

I expect we'd want them all to be provisional (not permanent), and that we don't
want a mailing list review of all 71 of them.

Does this sound reasonable? Just want to check before submitting 71 IANA
requests for third-party registrations.

-Dave

[Peter Saint-Andre]

Post by Dave Thaler
In a previous meeting I believe we agreed that we should encourage third-party
registrations of URI schemes that the owners didn’t register. And
indeed we
updated the language (e.g. around security considerations) to clarify how to do so.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/URI_scheme lists 71 unregistered URI schemes in
the “Unofficial but common URI schemes”. So it seems the right thing
to do is
to try to follow the 4395bis process for all 71 of them.
Not doing so would mean, IMO, we’d basically be leaving Wikipedia to be the
unofficial registry that people will actually use (and check for uniqueness when
submitting registrations) instead of the IANA registry.
I expect we’d want them all to be provisional (not permanent), and that
we don’t
want a mailing list review of all 71 of them.
Does this sound reasonable? Just want to check before submitting 71 IANA
requests for third-party registrations.

It does sound reasonable. I hope you wrote a little script to automate
all of that. :)

Peter

[Dave Thaler]

Post by Dave Thaler
Does this sound reasonable? Just want to check before submitting 71

IANA

Post by Dave Thaler
requests for third-party registrations.

It does sound reasonable. I hope you wrote a little script to automate all of
that. :)

Not yet, I didn't want to spend time writing the script un

[Martin J. Dürst]

I agree it's a good idea! I'd like to hear from Graham specifically,
because he's the reviewer, and if/when you send everything to IANA,
he'll have to have a look at it.

I'd also not send 71 separate mails, but put everything in a single big
mail. That way, the need for scripts may be quite a bit lower, too.

Regards, Martin.

Post by Dave Thaler
Does this sound reasonable? Just want to check before submitting 71

IANA

Post by Dave Thaler
requests for third-party registrations.

It does sound reasonable. I hope you wrote a little script to automate all of
that. :)

Not yet, I didn't want to spend time writing the script until we agreed it's
reasonable :)
-Dave