Re: Policy URL -> Policy URI

Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> Tue, 08 February 2005 23:35 UTC

Received: from above.proper.com (above.proper.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA22036 for <openpgp-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Feb 2005 18:35:05 -0500 (EST)
Received: from above.proper.com (localhost.vpnc.org [127.0.0.1]) by above.proper.com (8.12.11/8.12.9) with ESMTP id j18NFl7R046297; Tue, 8 Feb 2005 15:15:47 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-ietf-openpgp@mail.imc.org)
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by above.proper.com (8.12.11/8.12.9/Submit) id j18NFloa046296; Tue, 8 Feb 2005 15:15:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Authentication-Warning: above.proper.com: majordom set sender to owner-ietf-openpgp@mail.imc.org using -f
Received: from mail.enyo.de (mail.enyo.de [212.9.189.167]) by above.proper.com (8.12.11/8.12.9) with ESMTP id j18NFkW6046281 for <ietf-openpgp@imc.org>; Tue, 8 Feb 2005 15:15:46 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from fw@deneb.enyo.de)
Received: from deneb.enyo.de ([212.9.189.171]) by albireo.enyo.de with esmtp id 1Cyea2-0006gW-Vo; Wed, 09 Feb 2005 00:15:38 +0100
Received: from fw by deneb.enyo.de with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Cyea2-00018H-Fv; Wed, 09 Feb 2005 00:15:38 +0100
From: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
To: Rick van Rein <rick@openfortress.nl>
Cc: ietf-openpgp@imc.org
Subject: Re: Policy URL -> Policy URI
References: <20050207105021.GA17950@phantom.vanrein.org> <3c14e78650fa58b06576b2e617409837@callas.org> <874qgnqryp.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> <20050208183233.GC10858@jabberwocky.com> <20050208213445.GA56118@phantom.vanrein.org>
Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2005 00:15:38 +0100
In-Reply-To: <20050208213445.GA56118@phantom.vanrein.org> (Rick van Rein's message of "Tue, 08 Feb 2005 22:34:45 +0100")
Message-ID: <87ll9ymyn9.fsf@deneb.enyo.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-ietf-openpgp@mail.imc.org
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-openpgp/mail-archive/>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-openpgp-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
List-ID: <ietf-openpgp.imc.org>

* Rick van Rein:

> Florian,
>
>> > Back then, the URI *identified* a resource, but this doesn't make much
>> > sense in the OpenPGP context (were fingerprints are used to identify
>> > keys).  The keyserver location is just that, a location.
>> > 
>> > The URI terminology has changed since then.
>> 
>> If URI doesn't mean what it used to, does it then make sense to change
>> both the keyserver and policy URLs to URIs?
>
> Yes, please specify.  We don't want this to end up in a sort of FUD against
> URIs.  To the best of my knowledge, it's all really simple, as summarised
> here:
>
> http://rick.vanrein.org/blog/notes/urn-uri-url.2005-02-07-13-53.article

Ahem, STD 66 presents a slightly different view. 8-)

The problem is that it's impossible to distinguish identifiers and
locators at the syntax level.  It's not possible to uphold the URN/URL
distinction.