Re: [urn] CTS and CITE2 URNs

I believe the original rationale was that in the literary texts the Cts URN
was primarily imagined for, "#" might appear far more frequently "@", and
thus would more frequently require either escaping or eye-straining runs of
"##" (the first syntactic, the second interpreted as content).

Thanks for pointing out the outdated RFC reference!

Neel

On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 7:59 AM Hakala, Juha E <juha.hakala@helsinki.fi>
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.
>
> The project refers to RFC 2141 at http://cite-architecture.org/ctsurn/
> and elsewhere; they should use RFC 8141 instead.
>
> In theory, the project should use ISTC (International Standard Text Code)
> to identify textual works, but since ISTC has kicked the bucket, I would
> not insist on using it.
>
> Best,
>
> Juha
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: urn <urn-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Peter Saint-Andre
> Sent: tiistai 5. maaliskuuta 2019 3.52
> To: urn@ietf.org
> Subject: [urn] CTS and CITE2 URNs
>
> A few months ago while doing research for a side project, I came across
> two URN namespaces (used in humanistic scholarship) that had not yet been
> registered: CTS and CITE2. Since then I've worked with the scholars who
> designed these URN namespaces regarding the registration process. As a
> result, they have prepared the following two registrations:
>
> http://cite-architecture.org/ctsurn/rfc.txt
>
> http://cite-architecture.org/cite2urn/rfc.txt
>
> Review by the other members of the expert review team would be appreciated.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Peter
>
> _______________________________________________
> urn mailing list
> urn@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/urn
> _______________________________________________
> urn mailing list
> urn@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/urn
>