Welcome to Software Development on Codidact!
Will you help us build our independent community of developers helping developers? We're small and trying to grow. We welcome questions about all aspects of software development, from design to code to QA and more. Got questions? Got answers? Got code you'd like someone to review? Please join us.
How do authors of custom URI schemas prevent conflict with those registered with IANA in the future?
en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_URI_schemes states that:
Many URI schemes are registered with the IANA; however, there exist many unofficial URI schemes as well.
Everyone knows how to parse FTP, HTTP{S}, and WebDav{S} (etcetera), because each corresponds to a registered IETF RFC. Consequently, whether registered with IANA or not, nobody would re-define them.
Those, that do not want to be bound to an RFC, register their schemas with IANA (as the aforementioned have, regardless). However, that is not feasible for all use cases. An example is that I am implementing a custom URI schema for an AOSP package that may never be deployed, but may very well become popular, too, as is the way with FOSS.
Consequently, entire categories, of hundreds of thousands of custom URI schemas, unregistered with the IETF, exist. Outside of the Microsoft Store and Google Play Store, nothing appears to prevent conflicts, because nothing appears to differentiate those with global ("Permanent") scope from their local ("Provisional") counterparts.
I realise that this is no different to package names (except for RDNS ones, wherein the ".alt." TLD is applicable), but because IANA Media Types enforce a x. prefix for unofficial types, I presume that I have neglected to notice an equivalent. I hope so.
1 answer
Section 3.8 of Mr. 7595, Request For Comment (RFC) includes the following advice (emphasis mine):
Some organizations desire their own namespace for URI scheme names for private use (see Section 6). In doing so, it is important to prevent collisions and to make it possible to identify the owner of a private-use scheme. To accomplish these two goals, such organizations SHOULD use a prefix based on their domain name, expressed in reverse order. For example, a URI scheme name of com.example.mything might be used by the organization that owns the example.com domain name. Care must be taken, however, if the organization later loses the domain name embedded in their scheme names since domain name registrations are not permanent. To associate the private-use scheme name with the original organization, the private-use scheme can be registered using the registration procedure in Section 7.
0 comment threads
0 comment threads