Re: URN UUID question

Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> Tue, 11 March 2014 20:01 UTC

Return-Path: <stpeter@stpeter.im>
X-Original-To: urn-nid@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: urn-nid@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 675C11A07D0 for <urn-nid@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 13:01:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.449
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9YdIl6WBndRU for <urn-nid@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 13:01:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stpeter.im (mailhost.stpeter.im [207.210.219.225]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7E0C1A0538 for <urn-nid@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 13:01:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aither.local (unknown [24.8.184.175]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7444B40460; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 14:01:22 -0600 (MDT)
Message-ID: <531F6B92.9010508@stpeter.im>
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 14:01:22 -0600
From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Joel Kalvesmaki <kalvesmaki@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: URN UUID question
References: <CALPpAZ_fLwK80dcM5ty5pp2pLiafpW36uvK2WoJdKpuaWX6PQw@mail.gmail.com> <531F46B1.1030301@stpeter.im> <CALPpAZ9TStXyhv-rqtfMXT=bB8q0ds=E5xqiZ=Ae=KvupjET_Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALPpAZ9TStXyhv-rqtfMXT=bB8q0ds=E5xqiZ=Ae=KvupjET_Q@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/urn-nid/q9TdGA2GIMP-fCBuxc8-Me1IDYs
Cc: urn-nid@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: urn-nid@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: discussion of new namespace identifiers for URNs <urn-nid.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/urn-nid>, <mailto:urn-nid-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/urn-nid/>
List-Post: <mailto:urn-nid@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:urn-nid-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/urn-nid>, <mailto:urn-nid-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 20:01:30 -0000

It sounds to me as if you might want to use the 'tag' URI scheme:

https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4151

Peter

On 3/11/14, 1:31 PM, Joel Kalvesmaki wrote:
> Thanks for the suggestion. I had considered that option, but the string
> must conform to XML schema's <anyURI>,[1] to suit the purposes I
> mentioned (RDF, etc.). And no <anyURI> may begin with a numeral. It
> would also be important to have a scheme that any human or computer
> would recognize immediately as a URN.
>
> I had also considered the following (where NN = a suitable
> project-specific abbreviation or dt = date-time, as a project-agnostic
> urn scheme):
>
> urn:uuid-NN:f60330fd-1900-44ac-a825-__de70074e142e::2014-02-07Z
> urn:uuid-dt:f60330fd-1900-44ac-a825-__de70074e142e::2014-02-07Z
>
> But would either one require registration with IANA? If so, what what's
> the process and is it worthwhile? I have heard of at least one project
> that has simply coined its own urn:NNN: scheme on its own, but I do not
> fully understand what consequences face anyone setting out on that
> direction.
>
> One other possibility occurs to me, that of treating the time-date stamp
> as a fragment identifier:
> urn:uuid:f60330fd-1900-44ac-a825-__de70074e142e#2014-02-07Z
>
> But I suspect that would violate the RFC 4122 definition, no?
>
> Best wishes,
>
> jk
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#anyURI
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 1:24 PM, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im
> <mailto:stpeter@stpeter.im>> wrote:
>
>     On 3/4/14, 8:32 AM, Joel Kalvesmaki wrote:
>
>         I am developing an XML data model that requires users to name
>         versions
>         of a document. Each version's name should be unique, but
>         patterned to
>         allow anyone (human or computer) to associate it with the names
>         of other
>         versions of that document and to place it in chronological
>         sequence. The
>         name of each version must be a single string, specifically a
>         IRI/URI (to
>         facilitate, among other things, straightforward declarations in
>         RDF). It
>         should not be split into two elements. Naming must be as
>         decentralized
>         as possible.
>
>         My favored scheme for naming these entities would concatenate a UUID
>         (any style), a middle delimiter, and an ISO date/dateTime, e.g.,
>
>         urn:uuid:f60330fd-1900-44ac-__a825-de70074e142e::2014-02-07Z
>         urn:uuid:f60330fd-1900-44ac-__a825-de70074e142e::2014-02-__28T00:20:58.3Z
>
>         Would it be misleading to begin such a string with "urn:uuid:"
>         and if
>         so, what are the alternative best practices?
>
>         Perhaps there already exists a urn scheme that does what I intend?
>
>         Are there any other issues I should consider before adopting a
>         naming
>         scheme like this?
>
>
>     As far as I can see, you don't really need or necessarily want the
>     "urn:uuid:" string at the front. Why not things like this?
>
>     f60330fd-1900-44ac-a825-__de70074e142e::2014-02-07Z
>     f60330fd-1900-44ac-a825-__de70074e142e::2014-02-28T00:__20:58.3Z
>
>     Peter
>