Re: [dispatch] Submission of "URN Namespace for Metaverse Standards Forum Resources"

[Rick van Rein <[e-mail]>]

Hello,

In my humble of the URN namespace, it is intended to pin down specifications under names, with the intent of interoperability of independent implementations.  It is not primarily intended as a system of delegation for URI namespace allocation.

Ref: RFC 8141, Section 6.2, "registrants SHOULD provide a stable specification documenting the URN namespace definition".

Based on this, it seems unfit for the URN space to assign sub-names for something as broad and unspecific as "resources published by" any party.  Exceptions may exist for parties that can forward definitions to an existing naming/numbering system, such as the ISBN or the DOI numbering system, if the target organisation happens to be a standards organisation.

Constructive alternatives to a name scope delegation could be a mixture of
(1) to separately register URN forms for specific formats
(2) since this appears to be specific to one or a few domain names, to use the tag: URI defined in RFC 4151 or perhaps a URL format
(3) use the OID branch for Private Enteriprise Numbers, and possibly use urn:oid: as per RFC 3061.


I hope this is helpful.


Best wishes,
  -Rick