Re: Policy URL -> Policy URI

David Shaw <dshaw@jabberwocky.com> Tue, 08 February 2005 18:48 UTC

Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 13:32:33 -0500
From: David Shaw <dshaw@jabberwocky.com>
To: ietf-openpgp@imc.org
Subject: Re: Policy URL -> Policy URI
Message-ID: <20050208183233.GC10858@jabberwocky.com>
Mail-Followup-To: ietf-openpgp@imc.org
References: <20050207105021.GA17950@phantom.vanrein.org> <3c14e78650fa58b06576b2e617409837@callas.org> <874qgnqryp.fsf@deneb.enyo.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <874qgnqryp.fsf@deneb.enyo.de>
OpenPGP: id=99242560; url=http://www.jabberwocky.com/david/keys.asc
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.7i
Sender: owner-ietf-openpgp@mail.imc.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Feb 08, 2005 at 11:14:06AM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> 
> * Jon Callas:
> 
> > Okay, I see what you're saying, but is it necessary?
> >
> > A long time ago, the keyserver URL said URI and we changed it for 
> > reasons that I can't remember.
> 
> 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?

David

Policy URL -> Policy URI Rick van Rein
Re: Policy URL -> Policy URI Jon Callas
Re: Policy URL -> Policy URI Rick van Rein
Re: Policy URL -> Policy URI Rick van Rein
Re: Policy URL -> Policy URI Florian Weimer
Re: Policy URL -> Policy URI David Shaw
Re: Policy URL -> Policy URI Rick van Rein
Re: Policy URL -> Policy URI Florian Weimer
Re: Policy URL -> Policy URI David Shaw
Re: Policy URL -> Policy URI Rick van Rein