[urn] Re: Informal URN Namespace Registration Request for Trivore Corp.

[Peter Saint-Andre <[e-mail]>]

Hi Kari,

My apologies for the oversight. I will take care of this today.

Peter

On 5/1/26 6:26 AM, Kari Mattsson (Trivore) wrote:
> Dear all!
> I understod this application was "sort of" approved back in January. 
> Maybe it was not? Is there something else I need to do to get us on the 
> formal namespace list at <https://www.iana.org/assignments/urn- 
> namespaces/urn-namespaces.xhtml <https://www.iana.org/assignments/urn- 
> namespaces/urn-namespaces.xhtml>>?
> I'm asking, because I noticed list was updated about 2 weeks ago. Thank you!
> my best, Kari Mattsson
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Dale R. Worley <[e-mail]>
> *Sent:* 26 January 2026 04:47
> *To:* Kari Mattsson (Trivore) <[e-mail]>
> *Cc:* [e-mail] <[e-mail]>; [e-mail] 
> <[e-mail]>; URN-admin <[e-mail]>
> *Subject:* Re: [urn] Re: Informal URN Namespace Registration Request for 
> Trivore Corp.
> "Kari Mattsson (Trivore)" <[e-mail]> writes:
>> What you pointed out below is exactly our current state with Trivore
>> ID product.  I am very frank with you, it is currently a mess. I
>> personally do not like the current state.  We have scopes and claims
>> with https prefix, and we have plain strings.  Those current url
>> scopes and claims are already internally deprecated, and will be
>> changed to urn based on this registration "urn:trviore".  This
>> registration is part of that.
>>
>> We are modifying all those to what is according to new standard,
>> showing up those urn scopes and claims in the documentation in the
>> future releases. Trivore ID is a 10 year old product already and being
>> actively use by millions of people.  Refactoring is currently being
>> done.
>>
>> I hope this clarified the current state.
> 
> OK, yes, with the understanding that Trivore intends to update its scope
> and claim names to conform to the urn:trivore syntax, the registration
> looks good to me.  We have approved a lot of registrations whose syntaxes
> were considerably broader than the registrants intended to utilize in the
> foreseeable future.  But as long as the registrant is aware of good URN
> usage, the IETF does not need to supervise the details of the
> registrant's usage.
> 
> Dale
> 
> _______________________________________________
> urn mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]