- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 17:33:31 +0200
- To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
bugzilla@soe.ucsc.edu wrote: > http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9 > > > > > > ------- Additional Comments From lisa@osafoundation.org 2005-10-15 14:58 ------- > Text for the -08 version of the draft: > > Note that "DAV:" uses a scheme name defined solely for > the purpose of creating this namespace. Using a scheme name alone does > not create a compliant URI according to <xref target="RFC2396">RFC2396</xref>. > Furthermore, defining new schemes for namespaces is discouraged. > "DAV:" was defined before standard best practices emerged, and this > namespace is still used only because of significant existing deployments. > ... Well, in the meantime RFC2396 has been obsoleted, and RFC3986 makes "DAV:" a legal URI (<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc3986.html#rfc.section.D.2.p.4>). Thus I'd simply this to: -- Note that "DAV:" is an URI scheme name defined solely for the purpose of creating this namespace. However, defining a new URI scheme just for the purpose of identifying protocol elements is to be considered a bad practice, and should not be copied. It is still used in this protocol revision because of significant existing deployments. -- Best regards, Julian
Received on Sunday, 16 October 2005 15:33:52 UTC