IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [urn] I-D Action: draft-saintandre-urn-example-00

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Fri, 17 August 2012 13:08 UTC

Return-Path: <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
X-Original-To: urn@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: urn@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E03E321F852C for <urn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Aug 2012 06:08:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -104.257
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.257 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.658, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QV5lVLM20wwf for <urn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Aug 2012 06:08:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id BD00721F84B3 for <urn@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Aug 2012 06:08:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 17 Aug 2012 13:08:07 -0000
Received: from mail.greenbytes.de (EHLO [192.168.1.140]) [217.91.35.233] by mail.gmx.net (mp039) with SMTP; 17 Aug 2012 15:08:07 +0200
X-Authenticated: #1915285
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1804Z0Wwlw0JTg/k+79jp017bLrl0wDzdbKReCbYs v3l7Sy5M2r73MJ
Message-ID: <502E4237.8090804@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 15:08:07 +0200
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120713 Thunderbird/14.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
References: <201208162101.XAA08756@TR-Sys.de> <502DF26E.3050406@gmx.de> <502E31B0.8000500@network-heretics.com> <502E3460.209@gmx.de> <502E3666.9090308@network-heretics.com>
In-Reply-To: <502E3666.9090308@network-heretics.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
Cc: urn@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [urn] I-D Action: draft-saintandre-urn-example-00
X-BeenThere: urn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Revisions to URN RFCs <urn.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/urn>, <mailto:urn-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/urn>
List-Post: <mailto:urn@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:urn-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/urn>, <mailto:urn-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 13:08:11 -0000

On 2012-08-17 14:17, Keith Moore wrote
> That's not a very useful definition for determining whether a URN is
> appropriate.  But my point is that a URN should name _something_.

My understanding is that if you can give it a name (URI/URN), it is 
"something".

> In addition, it needs to be clear what is being named by the URN.
> Otherwise there's no way to ensure persistence of the binding between
> the URN and the resource.

Given a UUID, there's no way to know *what* is being named without 
additional information. How is that a problem in practice, if all you 
need is a unique identifier?


Best regards, Julian

v2.19.0 | Report a Bug | By Email