Re: [URN] Re: The UR* scheme registry, Citing URL/URI specs
"Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@kiwi.ics.uci.edu> Thu, 30 October 1997 08:20 UTC
Delivery-Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 03:20:54 -0500
Return-Path: owner-uri@Bunyip.Com
Received: from ns.cnri.reston.va.us (cnri [132.151.1.1]) by ietf.org (8.8.7/8.8.7a) with ESMTP id DAA06338 for <ietf-archive@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Oct 1997 03:20:53 -0500 (EST)
Received: from services.bunyip.com (services.Bunyip.Com [192.77.55.2]) by ns.cnri.reston.va.us (8.8.5/8.8.7a) with ESMTP id DAA12812; Thu, 30 Oct 1997 03:23:53 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by services.bunyip.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id DAA25844 for uri-out; Thu, 30 Oct 1997 03:08:30 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by services.bunyip.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id DAA25837 for uri-in; Thu, 30 Oct 1997 03:08:28 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mocha.bunyip.com (mocha.Bunyip.Com [192.197.208.1]) by services.bunyip.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id DAA25829 for <uri@services.bunyip.com>; Thu, 30 Oct 1997 03:08:26 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by mocha.bunyip.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id DAA13571 for uri@services; Thu, 30 Oct 1997 03:08:27 -0500 (EST)
Received: from paris.ics.uci.edu (paris.ics.uci.edu [128.195.1.50]) by mocha.bunyip.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id DAA13568; Thu, 30 Oct 1997 03:08:24 -0500 (EST)
Received: from kiwi.ics.uci.edu by paris.ics.uci.edu id aa15035; 30 Oct 97 0:05 PST
To: michaelm@rwhois.net
cc: uri@Bunyip.Com, connolly@w3.org, urn-ietf@Bunyip.Com, timbl@w3.org, masinter@parc.xerox.com, Harald.T.Alvestrand@uninett.no, moore@cs.utk.edu, lassila@w3.org, swick@w3.org, tbray@textuality.com, jeanpa@microsoft.com, cmsmcq@uic.edu, dsr@w3.org, lehors@w3.org, ij@w3.org
Subject: Re: [URN] Re: The UR* scheme registry, Citing URL/URI specs
In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 27 Oct 1997 22:52:20 EST." <199710280352.WAA14771@bailey.dscga.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 23:58:28 -0800
From: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@kiwi.ics.uci.edu>
Message-ID: <9710300005.aa15035@paris.ics.uci.edu>
Sender: owner-uri@Bunyip.Com
Precedence: bulk
>> Please note that the "L" in "URL" represents "Locator", not "Location".
>> Any naming scheme that requires there exist some mechanism for resolution,
>> whether or not the mechanism is currently in operation, changes over time,
>> or subject to multiple levels of indirection, is a locator.
>
>URNs never required a mechanism for resolution.
>
>> There do exist names that are not locators, but those names are not URNs.
>
>Actually, unless the documents have changed the design was that the URN
>need not have a resolution method.
That's what I thought too, until RFC 2141 went up for last call. E.g.,
7. Functional Equivalence in URNs
Functional equivalence is determined by practice within a given
namespace and managed by resolvers for that namespeace.
which in my mind is the same as requiring a resolution method. There is
no value in the "urn" scheme if it doesn't define functional equivalence.
Grump. Somebody should stick a spell checker in the RFC process --
I noticed a few weeks ago that the "Standard Copyright Notice" for all
RFCs has misspelled "implementation".
....Roy
- Re: [URN] Re: The UR* scheme registry, Citing URL… Roy T. Fielding
- Re: [URN] Re: The UR* scheme registry, Citing URL… Michael Mealling