RE: [xri] Solution for host-meta

["Drummond Reed" <drummond.reed@cordance.net>]

Works for me too.

Seems like we have consensus on this (if anyone disagrees, please shout
now).

Will, Eran: do you want to go ahead and add this to the spec text for WD05?

=Drummond 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Bradley [mailto:jbradley@mac.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2009 10:08 AM
> To: Eran Hammer-Lahav
> Cc: 'XRI TC'
> Subject: Re: [xri] Solution for host-meta
> 
> OK with me.
> 
> John B.
> On 25-Aug-09, at 12:08 PM, Eran Hammer-Lahav wrote:
> 
> > The problem with DNS is that it is semantically wrong and so yet
> > another hack.
> >
> > As for xri:, sure as long as you make it clear in the spec that it
> > is not to be considered a registered URI, just a string used
> > internally by XRD Subjects using URI syntax.
> >
> > Happy to do it first to see how people react to it.
> >
> > EHL
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: John Bradley [mailto:jbradley@mac.com]
> >> Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2009 8:32 AM
> >> To: Eran Hammer-Lahav
> >> Cc: 'XRI TC'
> >> Subject: Re: [xri] Solution for host-meta
> >>
> >> If you want it to be a registered scheme use dns:example.com
> >>
> >> The / are omitted because the authority is not required the host-name
> >> is part of the path.
> >>
> >> http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4501.txt
> >>
> >> I don't think you ned the port number.  One of the pints of host-meta
> >> is that it can be used by multiple schemes like mailto: if people
> >> want
> >> to.
> >>
> >> I don't mind making up a new scheme for this.
> >>
> >> If we do that can we make up xri: as well for unbound XRI?
> >> It would be the same argument.
> >>
> >> John B.
> >>
> >> On 25-Aug-09, at 4:22 AM, Eran Hammer-Lahav wrote:
> >>
> >>> I don't know why I didn't think about this before. As indicated in
> >>> my last email, this is what I propose we do:
> >>>
> >>> * Drop the match attribute.
> >>> * host-meta will use <Subject> with the string 'host-meta://
> >>> example.com:80'.
> >>> * host-meta will state that the string is not a valid URI and is
> >>> only used for trust purposes.
> >>>
> >>> Since XRD <Subject> has no current requirement for the URI scheme to
> >>> be valid or registered, only that the syntax of the string comply
> >>> with RFC 3986, this solves everyone's problem without actually
> >>> having to create/register a new URI scheme.
> >>>
> >>> EHL
> >>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> >>> generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> >>> https://www.oasis-
> >> open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
> >>>
> >
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php