[Uri-review] draft-farrell-decade-ni (was: Two new URI schemes for review)

[Graham Klyne <[e-mail]>]

On 04/05/2012 10:22, Eric Johnson wrote:
> I looked at this proposal, and had three points of confusion.
>
> a) Why is this being done as a "hierarchical" URI scheme, when the URI is not,
> in fact, hierarchical?
>
> That is, why ni://example.com/....?

I think the document explains that.

And I even have a possible use-case for this in an application I'm working on - 
a hashed identifier where further information may be available from the given 
authority.

> When implementations that manipulate URIs encounter the :// after the scheme,
> that should be a signal for them to associate meaning to "relative" URIs, as in:
>
> base URI: ni://example.com/sha-256;f4OxZX_x_FO5LcGBSKHWXfwtSx-j1ncoSt3SABJtkGk
>
> ... what does it mean to do "index.html" relative to said URI?

The answer to that is clear from RFC 3986:  ni://example.com/index.html ... even 
if it's not very useful.

> Can I compute a "sha-512" relative to the given URI? (Answer: no)

I'm not sure I understand the question, but one might want to express an 
already-known sha-512 with respect to the same base.

> I conclude that this should not be a hierarchical scheme.

I don't see any harm, and some possible (small) benefits.

#g
--

> b) Why isn't this just a URN with a particular namespace identifier?
>
> As in:
>
> urn:nhi:example.com:sha-256:f4OxZX_x_FO5LcGBSKHWXfwtSx-j1ncoSt3SABJtkGk
>
> (where nhi I just made up, but stands for "named hashed id", because URNs
> require at least three letters for namespace ids)
>
> That seems like a better fit.
>
> c) Since there are more known SHA standards, why not declare them all in this
> initial proposal, so that sha-384, and sha-512 are already defined?
>
> -Eric.
>
> On 4/30/12 5:56 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> We have a draft [1] that requests two new URI schemes.
>>
>> The core WG are likely to want to use these we think
>> and possibly decade, but they're intended to be generally
>> useful as well.
>>
>> Barry Leiba is planning to AD sponsor this and Alexey
>> Melnikov will be shepherding so if you can cc them ase
>> well as the authors on any questions or comments that'd
>> be good.
>>
>> I hope the plan is to IETF LC this soon, once this
>> review and the .well-known registration review are
>> done.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Stephen.
>>
>> [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-farrell-decade-ni-05
>> _______________________________________________
>> Uri-review mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uri-review
> _______________________________________________
> Uri-review mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uri-review
>