Re: [urn] CTS and CITE2 URNs

[Peter Saint-Andre <[e-mail]>]

On 3/5/19 7:30 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> On 05.03.2019 07:58, Hakala, Juha E wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> from my point of view these namespace registrations are interesting,
>> not least because I am currently involved revision of ISO 690, the ISO
>> standard for bibliographic referencing. URNs for citing resources is
>> something that needs to be considered in the revision process.
>>
>> I am in favour of registering these namespaces. The only reservation I
>> have is the usage of "@" to separate subreferences. Would it be
>> possible to use hash character for this purpose?
>>
>> At https://cite-architecture.github.io/ohco2/quick/
>>
>> the researchers themselves give the following example:
>>
>> urn:cts:greekLit:tlg5026.msA.hmt:1.2.lemma#μῆνις
>>
>> which would be better aligned with RFCs 3986 and 8141. According to
>> the request, there are no plans to make these URNs actionable, so in
>> the short term it does not really matter which character is used, but
>> if in the long term actionability becomes an issue, it is better not
>> to divert from RFC 3986 unless there is a good reason to do so.
>> ...
> 
> How is using "#" (the fragment identifier) better aligned with RFC 3986???

Correct. '@' is in the pchar rule from RFC 3986, and RFC 8141 defines
the NSS rule as one or more code points conforming to the pchar rule.
Thus '@' is fine here, as far as I can see.

Peter