Re: [urn] Standardization of URN R component semantics

["Henry S. Thompson" <[e-mail]>]

Hakala, Juha E writes:

> ...

> ... A more flexible solution would be a new Registered R-components
> section to the IANA register of URN namespaces
> (https://www.iana.org/assignments/urn-namespaces/urn-namespaces.xhtml)
>
> The initial set of services and service parameters could be
> something like this:

> I2L (URN to URL)
> I2Ls (URN to URLs)
> I2AL (URN to Web archive URL)
> I2ALs (URN to Web archive URLs)
> I2R (URN to Resource, default value)
> I2Rs (URN to Resources)
> I2C (URN to metadata)
> I2N (URN to PID, retrieval of another persistent identifiers of the same resource)
> I2Ns (URN to PIDs)

Just to be clear, when you use 'URL' above, do you mean
  1) An 'http:' or 'https:' URI;
  2) Some other (expected-to-be0 resolvable URI;
  3) Any non-URN URI;
  3) Any URI at all?

And when you use Resource, do you mean an HTTP-conformant response
message, i.e. HTTP headers and body?, containing a "representation of
the current state of the identified [by the URN] resource"?

Also, it's possible to read your proposal, given the example you're
starting from, as applying to services provided via HTTP(S).  Is that
your intent, or are you proposing to remain agnostic about the nature
of services, requests and responses, as 2483 tries be?

ht
-- 
       Henry S. Thompson, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh
      10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
                Fax: [phone], e-mail: [e-mail]
                       URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
 [mail from me _always_ has a .sig like this -- mail without it is forged spam]