I posted a similar plan just recently, and in reply someone told me that details of a URI scheme are already on the official wiki... sorry I don't have the link.

Edit: Here it is... https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/URI_Scheme

I dont see any reason to reinvent a standard which already works for such a small addition.  If a user clicks a bitcoin: link, the bitcoin client should ensure the user knows how much and to who the bitcoins will be transferred, making the url/i human-readable isn't a huge deal.  Also, several programs already use the existing standard, why change it now?  Lastly, in your standard, how does a client differentiate between a user's name and a transaction comment (the order it is specified in is not very useful especially if someone wants to only specify one of the two).  The same applies for the amount for a donation, I dont want to specify how much you have to donate but the user should chose.

The hex notation is optional, you can use decimal amounts too.

I thought something quite opposite... I thought the reason for using bitcoin: was that it's more psychologically acceptable for a layman due to similarity to mailto:

Here are the 2 proposed URI scheme :
- https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/URI_Scheme
- https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/X-btc

The second one proposes more actions than just "pay" :
- store an address in the address book,
- add a public/private key pair (and rescan blockchain),
- add a transaction (full data or just tx id ?)

Do we need some are all of this ?

I've got a working implementation of a bitcoin: URI handler in WalletBuddy. I assume that users won't be running Bitcoin all the time, so when such a link is clicked, it is sent to the payment queue. Any number of payments can be released from the payment queue to Bitcoin whenever Bitcoin is running.

I'm still working on some changes and fixes, but I hope to release an update with this functionality as well as some better documentation soon (hopefully this week).

Spesmilo also supports bitcoin: URIs

About implementation - I thought that implementing URI handlers is not a job for browser extensions, but the application itself registers the protocol in users operating system. So it's only a matter of implementing the protocol registration mechanism in Bitcoin client and we're done.

This issue is of some interest to me, so I'll try putting together a branch with a minimal implementation of URI handling. I'll initially support the "bitcoin:<address>" syntax, but without the additional parameters, which can be added later. URI handling will require RPC turned on, and I'm not going to attempt OS protocol registration for now.

Looks like I was beaten to the punch