Re: request for assignment of informal urn

Peter Saint-Andre - &yet <> Thu, 26 February 2015 04:18 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14A551A1A13 for <>; Wed, 25 Feb 2015 20:18:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.601
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id P2qTzUi-m3k9 for <>; Wed, 25 Feb 2015 20:18:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 678A41A01AA for <>; Wed, 25 Feb 2015 20:18:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: by iecrl12 with SMTP id rl12so10959582iec.4 for <>; Wed, 25 Feb 2015 20:18:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=OXwlDUngqpdFHsWqkDOVHT9hVA80FfRPkXFvUx3JwfE=; b=aJICHYwjfIWVIU6HB12VPgBITahIJ6PlaE3909T39/8Xg2ZzDw5Blu2pkeyO58KXts F4DzdWCXyc/hjjAFL2L3gaS8c0d/akcVCFwdpmcRa2/7wb87HNgDtEMqzUISMgn7qsrD OdMZ8uOnZEqUg3sjHiaTclPweZJWYAxtlbuFTlKQDDuXcL/NftmwcNCMfWVX2CM6kUCJ 3ekVMUkMLAQva2+rPmkJH826QUAIl8U/MDy1sITiPq4oOyOcwSPQd7bB1m/qItK3aww4 5qnwwk8TCgObx6dEHIb28eYbQgPmwH9J9kziOZr62ZNSdV1KSXDFUSm3VkWF90bn3yHi 7PAw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQniy9bIkPxs/dTWy+QK1OAhIoI8r6qs7o0k/7dMqb7M1Lwipznm1zLbNZBE5K8ysERR79JQ
X-Received: by with SMTP id h6mr9435830igt.22.1424924305832; Wed, 25 Feb 2015 20:18:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from aither.local ( []) by with ESMTPSA id e196sm8540001ioe.40.2015. (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 25 Feb 2015 20:18:25 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <>
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 21:18:23 -0700
From: Peter Saint-Andre - &yet <>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Dale R. Worley" <>,
Subject: Re: request for assignment of informal urn
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: discussion of new namespace identifiers for URNs <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 04:18:28 -0000

On 2/25/15 8:37 PM, Dale R. Worley wrote:
> <> writes:
>> As a result, our urn is a form of UUID/ISBN + FILENAME + EPUBCFI.
> For some reason, I overlooked the FILENAME component.  That's a mistake
> on my part.
> But it means that we can't look at these as simply "UUID/ISBN plus
> fragment identifier (EPUBCFI)".
> An alternative syntax would be if the FILENAME information could be
> included in the EPUBCFI.  But I expect that you've verfied that there is
> no good way to do that.
> I can see why you'd need a new namespace, because you need the
> additional FILENAME information in the URN proper.

But fragment identifiers are disallowed by RFC 2141. This registration 
can't go forward until the URNBIS work completes. At which point, I 
think it would be better to define real namespaces (e.g., it's likely 
that the ISBN namespace will be updated to allow f-components) instead 
of forcing it into an informal namespace.

I STRONGLY encourage the authors of this registration to read the latest 
URNBIS document and provide feedback on the list:

Coordination with Juha Hakala about the ISBN namespace would also be 
very beneficial.


Peter Saint-Andre