Subject: [Uri-review] sms uri scheme

From: Erik Wilde <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2004 14:57:19 +0100

hello.

since i have received so little feedback about the two drafts regarding 
an sms uri scheme (http://dret.net/netdret/publications#wil01g and 
http://dret.net/netdret/publications#wil02a) i am trying again to get 
some feedback. feedback would be welcome about two issues:

- is the uri scheme ok as it is proposed in the drafts. since i haven't 
heard any criticism in a while, i would assume that either the people 
who should criticize the scheme are not reading these lists, or the 
scheme as proposed is technically acceptable.

- the major problem obviously is the question of how to call the scheme. 
the scheme naming issue seems to be a slowly moving activity. in my 
humble opinion, the reason why this even affects the "sms" drafts is 
that in the u.s. the popularity of sms messages is not nearly as high as 
it is in the rest of the world. i would be interested to find out who 
really thinks that "oma-sms" or "itu-sms" would be reasonable ways to 
name the scheme. btw, is there talk about renaming the tel and fax 
schemes to "itu-tel" and "itu-fax" ... ? i think that it is not 
appropriate to apply all the objections against scheme name misuse to 
the proposed sms scheme, since sms (in the non-u.s. parts of the world) 
messaging is as ubiquitous as phone and fax usage.

please let me know if you have any opinion about these issues. and if 
anybody had any suggestions how i could restart the ietf machinery to 
actually process the drafts, i would be most grateful.

thanks and cheers,

erik wilde  -  tel:+41-1-6325132  -  fax:+41-1-6321035
   mailto:[email-masked]  -  http://dret.net/netdret
   computer engineering and networks laboratory   (tik)
   swiss federal institute of technology, zurich (ethz)

_______________________________________________
Uri-review mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uri-review