On Thursday 06 August 2009, Michal Brzozowski wrote: > 2009/8/5 Sebastian Krzyszkowiak <seba.d...@gmail.com> > > > This way you > > could have for instance voip:d...@shr.com <voip%3a...@shr.com>, skype:dos > > or something else. > > But of course it would be nice to discuss it with FSO guys. > > You suggest 'Peer' : 'tel:+xxx' or 'Peer' : 'voip:a...@bbb'. > > How about putting the prefix in the attribute name. 'Peer_tel:' : '+xxx' or > 'Peer_voip' : 'a...@bbb'. > > Now it's like nesting attributes in attributes. Why force people to > additionally parse the data.
If the content is a proper URI then we shouldn't have any trouble parsing it. tel: is the right way to start a phone number URI. See RFC3966. voip: is probably wrong, but sip: or h323: are well defined. The problem here is having two fields but at least three independent properties. We have at least: * Communication medium (voice, text, video, etc.) * The URI which gives protocol and address * Disambiguation of more than one of the above, possibly indicating association (Home, Office1, Office2, Mobile etc.) _______________________________________________ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
