Re: [Uri-review] Allow identifying issues with ISSN NID

"Daniel R. Tobias" <dan@tobias.name> Thu, 21 May 2009 00:28 UTC

Return-Path: <dan@tobias.name>
X-Original-To: uri-review@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: uri-review@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7FFE3A6911 for <uri-review@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 May 2009 17:28:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AajEqQLqsrnv for <uri-review@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 May 2009 17:28:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from looneymail-a3.g.dreamhost.com (caibbdcaaaaf.dreamhost.com [208.113.200.5]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B44E73A68E3 for <uri-review@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 May 2009 17:28:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.100] (c-66-176-192-33.hsd1.fl.comcast.net [66.176.192.33]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DES-CBC3-SHA (168/168 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by looneymail-a3.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D022D27B2A for <uri-review@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 May 2009 17:30:17 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Daniel R. Tobias" <dan@tobias.name>
Organization: Barely
To: uri-review@ietf.org
Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 20:30:00 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <4A146848.2315.E7ECD29@dan.tobias.name>
Priority: normal
In-reply-to: <1242846763.4093.167.camel@dbooth-laptop>
References: <35A23FE7952844FBA667A306B8CDC982@POCZTOWIEC>, <B7FB6772505B40DB9AF8AA1E119240B4@POCZTOWIEC>, <1242846763.4093.167.camel@dbooth-laptop>
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (4.41)
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Content-description: Mail message body
Subject: Re: [Uri-review] Allow identifying issues with ISSN NID
X-BeenThere: uri-review@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proposed URI Schemes <uri-review.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uri-review>, <mailto:uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/uri-review>
List-Post: <mailto:uri-review@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uri-review>, <mailto:uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 May 2009 00:28:41 -0000

On 20 May 2009 at 19:12, David Booth wrote:

> The owner of a URI space can define whatever syntactic conventions are
> desired for minting URIs in that URI space, and can publish these
> conventions just as the conventions for URNs were published.

How does any of this become normative, authoritive, and binding on 
anybody including the issuer him/herself?  I own the domain dan.info, 
and I can issue whatever proclamations I want about URIs within it, 
like "http://dan.info/dogs/fido" refers to a dog named Fido, but why 
should anybody regard this as having any standards-level authority, 
and if the following day I said I was only kidding about that dog 
stuff, which statement would have more authority?


-- 
== Dan ==
Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/
Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/
Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/