Re: [urn] Finalizing items from IETF 83

["Svensson, Lars" <[e-mail]>]

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.

All the best,

Lars

***Lesen. Hören. Wissen. 100 Jahre Deutsche Nationalbibliothek***
***Reading. Listening. Understanding. A century of the German National Library***

-- 
Dr. Lars G. Svensson
Deutsche Nationalbibliothek / Informationstechnik
http://www.dnb.de/
[e-mail]
http://www.dnb.de/100jahre


> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] Im Auftrag von
> Juha Hakala
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 28. Juni 2012 08:18
> An: [e-mail]
> Betreff: Re: [urn] Finalizing items from IETF 83
> 
> Hello,
> 
> Concerning this:
> 
> On 26.6.2012 19:10, Andy Newton wrote:
> > All,
> 
> > Second, at IETF 83 Leslie Daigle proposed removing the fragment
> language from 2141bis and placing it in a separate draft to be moved
> forward as an Experimental RFC. If you have objections to this
> approach, please let us know (again, before July 13).
> 
> I have an objection, but the fragment related sections of RFC2141bis
> must be made more clear.
> 
> The terms and conditions governing the fragment use are on the one hand
> technical, and on the other hand identifier system dependent. From
> technical point of view, fragments are part of the URI but they are not
> part of the NSS. From identifier system point of view, fragments are
> only applicable when a) the identifier system covers only
> manifestations and b) single manifestation of a resource only gets one
> identifier, which is never re-assigned.
> 
> In practice, this means that fragments are not applicable if the
> identifier covers immaterial works (like International Standard Text
> Code). Also, fragments cannot be used if the identifier covers multiple
> manifestations (for instance International Standard Serial Number
> applies to the entire journal). But fragments can be used with e.g.
> ISBNs since each ISBN is assigned to single manifestation of a book,
> such as PDF or XML version.
> 
> Since fragment is not part of the namespace specific string, a user who
> for instance wants to cite a certain paragraph of an e-book may add a
> fragment to the existing URN:ISBN of the book in order to provide a
> persistent link to the paragraph (assuming that the e-book is
> structured in such a way that this is possible).
> 
> When an e-book is migrated to another file format in order to preserve
> it, then according to the ISBN user guide the new version of the book
> must get another ISBN. Any identifier system which allows
> identification of multiple manifestations with a single identifier is
> not applicable for fragment use.
> 
> Depending on what the list attendees agree on, we may place a text to
> the above effect into rfc2141bis or into an experimental document. 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.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Juha
> 
> >
> > -andy
> > (obviously over-paid co-chair).
> > _______________________________________________
> > urn mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/urn
> 
> --
> 
>   Juha Hakala
>   Senior advisor, standardisation and IT
> 
>   The National Library of Finland
>   P.O.Box 15 (Unioninkatu 36, room 503), FIN-00014 Helsinki University
>   Email [e-mail], tel [phone]
> _______________________________________________
> urn mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/urn