Re: URL attributes

[[e-mail]]

>
> Can I suggest we stop this silly discussion? Silly because the IETF has a WG
> called uri that has been discussing this for 1,5 years now and has nearly
> reached concensus on the URL. The latest doc is quite stable. No use to
> start repeating the discussion before you all read that doc.
> 
> Erik
> 
> 

We had private mail exchange with Erik.


a few statements:
------------------
There is some misunderstanding

   we are not discussing any new form of URL
   we are not discussing any URN to URL resolution

   we are/were discussing usage of URL (in fact now full html)
	as X.500 attributes in order to provide cheap multimedia to
	X.500 and nice integration between X.500 and WWW

Thus I maintain this was not silly talks


The conclusion is
-----------------

	we have been asked to move this discussion to the Paradise list

	though I think this would be better in wg-nap or osi-ds
	because it is not a matter of operation, but really
	discussing and eventually specifying that type of usage.
	This in my mind is totally in line with what is expected
	from the general WPS discussion which is not restricted to
	one single protocol and aims at providing the best service
	to end-users.


	We will stop any discussion on this issue in osi-ds


-- PAP

PS: if you think wg-nap (the RARE complement to osi-ds) is better suited 
than Paradise then use [e-mail] list to state it, I am the Wg-nap 
convenor and will not blame you :-).
Please don't use osi-ds any longer on this topic.

PS2: if you want to make your mind, for trial purpose only, you
can use from a WWW client 
	http://perignon.inria.fr:2200/x500demo.html
and look at touvet or pays entries in the INRIA X500 base