Re: [urn] URN Namespace Registration Request for "PNO"

["Steindl, Guenter" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Peter,



Is it possible to say more at this time about the format of PNO URNs? In general, we like to see as much detail as possible when registering new namespaces.



PNO (https://www.profibus.com/pi-organization/about-pi) is working together with SDOs (IEC, IEEE, DKE, ...) for more than 30 years.



PNO is the host for technologies like PROFIBUS, PROFINET, OMLOX, IO-Link, MTP, ...



Thus, the principal structure will be



urn:pno:profibus:{identifier}



urn:pno:profinet:{identifier}



...



The technologies themselves will have to define the structure "behind" their identifier.



Example for Profinet:



Table 1102 – URN values for identifying an end station

Name

Values

Meaning

NID

"pno"

Constant according to this specification.

NSS

profinet:uci/v1"

Constant according to this specification.

q-component

List of keyword values pair with the format,
keyword=value.



Keywords are:
"VendorID",
"OrderID",
"IM_Serial_Number",
"IM_Hardware_Revision"

Values according to the corresponding I&M0 data

Example:
urn:pno:profinet:uci/v1?=VendorID=0xFFFF
&OrderID=ABCDEF&IM_Serial_Number=12345&IM_Hardware_Revision=0x0001



It seems perhaps that this registration request is forward-looking: PNO feels the need to register the namespace before it can be confident about including such URNs in its specifications, but those specifications have not yet been written so PNO cannot yet say what the format of the URNs will be. Is this an accurate statement?



Some of the specifications (e.g. PROFINET) are updated every year (every May) - knowing that their IEC version will only be updated every 3 to 5 years!



Regards

Günter



-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----

Von: Peter Saint-Andre <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>

Gesendet: Montag, 15. April 2024 02:06

An: Steindl, Günter (DI FA CTR ICO) <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>

Betreff: Re: [urn] URN Namespace Registration Request for "PNO"



Thank you for this registration request. Comments inline.



On 4/8/24 5:15 AM, Steindl, Guenter wrote:



> 3. Guidelines for URN Structure:

>

>     - URNs within the "pno" namespace will follow the following structure:

>

>       urn:pno:{identifier}

>

>       Where {identifier} is a unique string that identifies a specific

> resource within the namespace. The format and content of the

> {identifier} will be determined by PROFIBUS Nutzerorganisation e.V.

> (PNO) / PROFIBUS & PROFINET International (PI) and may include

> alphanumeric characters, hyphens, underscores, and other allowed characters.



Is it possible to say more at this time about the format of PNO URNs? In general, we like to see as much detail as possible when registering new namespaces.



> 4. Additional Information

>

> This URN will be part of future standardization efforts of e.g.

> “PROFINET” as part of the IEC61158/IEC61784 at the IEC.



It seems perhaps that this registration request is forward-looking: PNO feels the need to register the namespace before it can be confident about including such URNs in its specifications, but those specifications have not yet been written so PNO cannot yet say what the format of the URNs will be. Is this an accurate statement?



Peter