I have to admit I was being facetious; my point was that anything solving this problem is going to have the same scope of web browsers and is more directly solved by them. If you imagine your setup was in-place, and pretty much everyone defined their own protocol with their own app, then that's roughly equivalent to the web as it is now, except also that the web has already done the hard work of establishing the open standards and being cross-platform. It's not clear to me what benefits introducing the things in your post would add to the web.
Web browsers have an ideological position that isn't compatible. Mozilla doesn't want to promote anything.
While we can create a system that supports n protocols we really only need a hand full of new things at a time.
The benefit is fetching stuff over ipfs, onion, gopher, freenet, zeronet, dat, blockstack, news and even irc
Until we can visit ipfs://example.com after a clean install the whole project borders a pipe dream.
I argue that if you cant see the benefits we've done a terrible job explaining them to you. It is sort of a chicken and egg problem. Why would I put a news:// link on my website if you cant do anything with it?
The expected behavior is a prompt asking if you want to install a news reader and register with a news server.
