IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [urn] Finalizing items from IETF 83

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Thu, 28 June 2012 10:09 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 1C71821F87DD for <urn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Jun 2012 03:09:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.742
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.742 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.143, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YMt5eHhVxpgs for <urn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Jun 2012 03:09:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 7F8D621F8A25 for <urn@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Jun 2012 03:01:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 28 Jun 2012 10:01:52 -0000
Received: from unknown (EHLO [42.1.1.153]) [192.147.117.12] by mail.gmx.net (mp034) with SMTP; 28 Jun 2012 12:01:52 +0200
X-Authenticated: #1915285
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19MOkxjr7RM3tS/HauxVV4Vx1NoOAAVjW48IlsiF4 2RbrS8rq4zw07Y
Message-ID: <4FEC2B8C.4070604@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 12:01:48 +0200
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Svensson, Lars" <L.Svensson@dnb.de>
References: <234FA8E3-C00D-4DA9-AD6C-41A3AC2548E4@hxr.us> <4FEBF708.9030604@helsinki.fi> <24637769D123E644A105A0AF0E1F92EF246915EE@dnbf-ex1.AD.DDB.DE>
In-Reply-To: <24637769D123E644A105A0AF0E1F92EF246915EE@dnbf-ex1.AD.DDB.DE>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
Cc: "urn@ietf.org" <urn@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [urn] Finalizing items from IETF 83
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: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 10:09:54 -0000

On 2012-06-28 11:42, Svensson, Lars wrote:
> Juha wrote:
>
>> But
>> I hope that RFC2141bis will say at least that fragments are not part of
>> the NSS but they can be used in those namespaces which specifically
>> allow that.
>
> I'll second that RFC 2141bis says that fragment identifiers are allowed in URNs but that they are not part of the NSS. Further, RFCs for new namespaces must specify if they allow the use of fragment identifiers or not but I guess that is something for RFC 3406bis.

No.

Namespace specifications define the namespace-specific part; nothing 
else. Fragment syntax and semantics are defined by RFC 3986.

A spec *can* point out that the URN does not identify something from 
which a payload + media type can be retrieved, in which fragment 
identifiers are not applicable. But that's different from disallowing them.

Best regards, Julian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email