Microid mailing list

[Fred Stutzman <fred AT metalab.unc.edu>]

On Wed, 15 Aug 2007, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:

> Yaniv Golan wrote:
> > Oops. I actually think the "+" thing was my proposal, and therefore my
> > fault. Sorry about that :)
>
> No worries. I should have checked RFC 3986. :)
>
> > Because there are no current schemes using "+",
>
> There are no current registered schemes. The only scheme I use with a
> "+" in it is svn+ssh (but it is not registered with the IANA).
>
> > I vote +1 for option
> > #2 (Provide guidance for handling of "+"), and I suggest specifying
> > that the schema name should be URL-encoded, so that "+" will become
> > "%2B".
>
> So on the off chance that someone uses svn+ssh as input to a MicroID,
> the resulting MicroID would be something like:
>
> mailto+svn%2Bssh:sha1:some-long-hash-here
>
> That seems acceptable.
>
> /psa

+1

-Fred


> > Yaniv
> >
> > --
> > Yaniv Golan
> > CTO, Yedda | http://yedda.com
> > e: yaniv AT yedda.com | m: +972-54-4-548-249 | my yedda:
> > http://yedda.com/people/9512186217351
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: microid-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org [mailto:microid-
> > > bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Peter Saint-Andre
> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 12:45 AM
> > > To: Brian Suda
> > > Cc: microid AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > > Subject: Re: [Microid] Augmented Backus-Naur Form Scheme issues?
> > >
> > > Brian Suda wrote:
> > > > i did a quick search through the archives and didn´t find
> > > anything
> > > > http://www.google.is/search?hl=is&client=firefox-
> > > a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-
> > > US%3Aofficial&hs=Q5N&q=site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Flists.ibiblio.org%2Fpi
> > > permail%2Fmicroid%2F+scheme&btnG=Leita&lr=
> > > > Can some one confirm that this is not actually an issue, or
> > > that it
> > > > doesn´t matter that it is?
> > > >
> > > > According to the scheme:
> > > > inputs  = scheme "+" scheme
> > > > scheme  = ALPHA *( ALPHA / DIGIT / "+" / "-" / "." )
> > > >           ; a URI scheme name (e.g., mailto)
> > > >
> > > > you can have multiple schemes separated by a + symbol, but the
> > > scheme
> > > > itself can have a + in it. For example:
> > > >
> > > > svn+ssh as one scheme, concatenated + with a second scheme,
> > > https
> > > > that would be svn+ssh+https, how would you know that is svn+ssh
> > > and
> > > > not ssh+http? or is that even an issue?
> > > That is a good catch. Section 3.1 of RFC 3986 defines scheme as
> > > follows:
> > >
> > >    scheme = ALPHA *( ALPHA / DIGIT / "+" / "-" / "." )
> > >
> > > So you're right that "+" is allowed in the scheme name. Clearly
> > > we did
> > > not check the URI syntax when we defined the MicroID syntax, and
> > > a quick
> > > check of the IANA registry would have revealed no schemes with
> > > "+" in
> > > the name:
> > >
> > > http://www.iana.org/assignments/uri-schemes.html
> > >
> > > We should have chosen a character that's not allowed in "scheme",
> > > such
> > > as "_".
> > >
> > > But I'm not sure what to do about it now. We could:
> > >
> > > 1. Change the separator to "_" or somesuch.
> > >
> > >    Pro: Conforms to RFC 3986.
> > >    Con: Breaks existing implementations.
> > >
> > > 2. Provide guidance for handling of "+".
> > >
> > >    Pro: Doesn't break existing implementations.
> > >    Con: Potentially confusing; does not conform to RFC 3986.
> > >
> > > The spec writer in me likes (1), but the documentation guy in me
> > > prefers
> > > (2) since I really don't like to break existing implementations.
> > >
> > > Peter
> > >
> > > --
> > > Peter Saint-Andre
> > > https://stpeter.im/

--

Fred Stutzman
919-260-8508
ibiblio.org/fred
fred AT metalab.unc.edu

Co-Founder and Developer, ClaimID.com
Ph.D. Student and Research Fellow, SILS UNC-Chapel Hill