Re: [urn] URN fragments

[Julian Reschke <[e-mail]>]

On 2013-02-26 20:26, [e-mail] wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Quoting Peter Saint-Andre <[e-mail]>:
>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 2/26/13 9:01 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
>>> On 2013-02-22 07:57, Juha Hakala wrote:
>
>>>> Despite the addition of fragment and query the URN itself remains
>>>> the same, even though the HTTP URI changes. ...
>>>
>>> Well, it's a different string, thus a different URN.
>>
>> Correct. As Martin suggested, one might refer to the
>> organizationally-assigned or algorithmically-determined URN as an
>> "absolute URN", but that doesn't change the fact that absolute+query
>> or absolute+fragment is still a different URN.
>
> It is a different string, thus a different URI, as dictated by RFC 3986.
>
> But it is the same URN, since fragment is not part of the Namespace
> specific string, as specified by the Alfred Hoenes' version of the URN
> syntax, or any other syntax specification which approves the current
> idea that fragment is not part of the NSS. And we know already that
> incorporating the fragment into NSS would cause a lot of avoidable
> trouble (for instance, many namespaces could not use fragment at all).

I was actually talking about the query part; sorry for the confusion.

It's up to the URN or NIS syntax to describe what the query part means, 
and how it applies to different namespaces. But in *general*, adding a 
query part to a URI changes the resource being identified.

Best regards, Julian