At 21:55 13/10/2012, Larry Masinter wrote:
I know there are a lot of private conversations about this, but I'd
like to try, in the time frame of the next W3C TPAC and IETF
meetings, to work out a solution to the issue of "forking" the URL
specifications. Does everyone know what the issues are?
Is everyone willing to talk about solutions?
I think forking is harmful and unnecessary.
Bcc: "[email protected]" IETF W3C Liaison
"[email protected]" W3C Web Applications group
chartered to work on something in W3C URL releated
"[email protected]" W3C Technical Architecture Group, since
we discussed it
" [email protected]" mailing list of IETF IRI working
group, responsible for IRI spec
Did I leave anyone out?
IUCG is certainly interested discussing this from an IUser point of
view. We are currently preparing a Draft on the syntax of digital
names for the whole digital ecosystem (WDE) with the same ambition of
not forking/keeping interoperable the URL specs. We are in the early
phase of working on an Intelligent Use Digital Name Server prototype
to support different namespaces, addressing plans, including DNS,
IPv4 and IPv6 requests. We focus on multilinguistic naming, wiki
exchanges and semantic addressing. At this stage CCN (content
centered networking) with early considerations on "wiki 3.0" is the matter.
jfc
NB. We are still small, emerging and disseminated so our present
working approach is to start from a real prototype services
experimentation. We are in line with the report to the IESG on the
constraints met, for example by the French language semantic with the
IDNA2008 RFCs (lack of support of majuscules) and the reliability
issues discussed by the AD irt. the IDNA concept. We always said we
would address this through the ML-DNS fringe to fringe architecture
(the emerging IUTF area). Our interest includes "common names" and
IPv6 address names (as local IPv6 addresses through IPv4 access) as well.
