Editorial: tuple origin member types

[annevk]

For scheme and port types we refer to members of the URL concept. This is wrong. The members belong to a concept, they don't represent a type.

The simplest solution would be to write "ASCII string" and "null or a 16-bit unsigned integer" instead.

The more ambitious solution would be to introduce a standalone scheme and port concept in URL. (This has come up before, but I'm not sure there was a good use case.)

Thoughts?

[domenic]

Simple solution seems reasonable. It seems like a pain to properly use the scheme type everywhere. (Port is probably less painful.)

[annevk]

Yeah, I guess I wasn't thinking of introducing more concrete types, mainly giving the string and number a name. But even that seems a bit much without more use cases.