Re: [urn] META URN namespace registration

Done.

On 11/14/22 9:25 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> Hi Juha,
> 
> Thanks for confirming. I will contact IANA about adding this namespace 
> to the registry.
> 
> Peter
> 
> On 11/14/22 4:34 AM, Hakala, Juha E wrote:
>> Hello Peter; all,
>>
>> the latest version of the the registration request is the one sent 
>> 2020-05-27.
>>
>> In this case providing additional information is useful, since it 
>> gives potential users an idea of benefits these URNs may provide.
>>
>> All the best,
>>
>> Juha
>>
>> -----Alkuperäinen viesti-----
>> Lähettäjä: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
>> Lähetetty: tiistai 8. marraskuuta 2022 22.56
>> Vastaanottaja: Hakala, Juha E <juha.hakala@helsinki.fi>; Dale R. 
>> Worley <worley@ariadne.com>
>> Kopio: urn@ietf.org; Thomas Baker <tom@tombaker.org>
>> Aihe: Re: [urn] META URN namespace registration
>>
>> Hello Juha,
>>
>> As far as I can see, this namespace identifier is ready to be 
>> registered. For the avoidance of doubt, would you mind verifying that 
>> the most up-to-date version is contained in the document you sent to 
>> this list on 2020-05-27?
>>
>> (Although that completed registration template does not exactly 
>> conform to RFC 8141, it errs on the side of including more information 
>> than required by RFC 8141, so it seems acceptable to me; but I would 
>> be happy to work with you on moving around some of the content so that 
>> it is more
>> conformant.)
>>
>> Peter
>>
>> On 5/26/20 11:49 PM, Hakala, Juha E wrote:
>>> Hello Dale; all,
>>>
>>> I have made two changes to the registration request (see below). 
>>> Please let me know if any further changes are required.
>>>
>>> -----Alkuperäinen viesti-----
>>> Lähettäjä: Dale R. Worley <worley@ariadne.com>
>>> Lähetetty: keskiviikko 27. toukokuuta 2020 5.55
>>> Vastaanottaja: Hakala, Juha E <juha.hakala@helsinki.fi>
>>> Kopio: urn@ietf.org
>>> Aihe: Re: [urn] META URN namespace registration
>>>
>>> This looks good to me, except possibly these:
>>>
>>>       Namespace URN:META:MARC: contains URNs which identify the tags of
>>>
>>> You almost certainly don't want the final ":", as that presupposes 
>>> that a sub-namespace code will follow.  Other examples use 
>>> "URN:META:MARC".
>>>
>>> Juha: I have removed the final ":" from the attached version.
>>>
>>>       Assuming that the registered resolver base URL for urn:meta:dc is
>>>       http://example.com/, urn:meta:dc:terms-title would be resolved by
>>>       fetching
>>>
>>>       http://example.com/urn:meta:dc:terms-title
>>>
>>> After looking at these again, I realize that there is an open 
>>> question whether the prefix is "dc:terms" or "dc".  There is no 
>>> mention in the registrations that "dc:terms" is a defined 
>>> sub-namespace, but nothing rules out that it exists.  If the intended 
>>> prefix is "dc", then the URN should be "urn:meta:dc-terms-title".  If 
>>> the intended prefix is "dc:terms", it would prevent the reader from 
>>> making this mistake if you state that explicitly.  Indeed, if "dc" is 
>>> expected to have sub-namespaces, it might be useful to annotate its 
>>> registration with their names.
>>>
>>> Juha: Dublin Core has currently two namespaces, /terms/ and 
>>> /elements/1.1/. In the registration request, there are now two Dublin 
>>> Core -related sub-namespaces in the expanded Example 2, 
>>> urn:meta:dc:terms and urn:meta:dc:elements1.1.
>>>
>>> FYI, elements from /elements/1.1/ are replicated as properties in 
>>> /terms/, but definitions of these properties differ slightly from 
>>> those used for elements in /elements/1.1/. Therefore property Title 
>>> in /terms/ is not exactly the same as element Title in /elements/1.1/.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Juha
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> urn mailing list
>>> urn@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/urn
>>
> 