IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [urn] [apps-discuss] URNs are not URIs (another look at RFC 3986)

Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com> Sat, 19 April 2014 02:34 UTC

Return-Path: <hallam@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: urn@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: urn@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0508B1A0224; Fri, 18 Apr 2014 19:34:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SMjM555Vu9Te; Fri, 18 Apr 2014 19:34:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lb0-x22d.google.com (mail-lb0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::22d]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED5E21A021E; Fri, 18 Apr 2014 19:34:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lb0-f173.google.com with SMTP id p9so1790857lbv.4 for <multiple recipients>; Fri, 18 Apr 2014 19:34:40 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=lSa50wEseoxWj3d2gaF2XEnoV5izdqZTv91UroGlh4o=; b=wyXObgy81MA+NdOpYPK9f3UXS8/49T8UpwZBCjhOduZD+Axw45Kw6oNbqHrhdsq46w VIfCpAtKRjxCw95tHfvIdukNCEws1GPcTtfWb934Q7RgNos1+NnrSSFWq208I0I+wenI FLN535m6nOkomgG0YpvY2FVkHJoYF9xAhWzJ/6r7FevbzG9LtPYyT9Vivl/ZA9koqqJp hKHKfzBYme4wtL4DwTZRQtmgNk66ev7rgVNdRIqPORgwmRxu155ux0kWmJkKnSD17Dbr 0fclqVlN14S5+s1ny0ISgQRfZ1RBAFK/bkYbrWiC7RxqmitHPQ/+kl5r2pqlLSnVu9Pc X5Tg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.61.199 with SMTP id s7mr1688934lbr.25.1397874880095; Fri, 18 Apr 2014 19:34:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.112.234.229 with HTTP; Fri, 18 Apr 2014 19:34:40 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CALcoZioKSLxtK9APfmSqQaKWSMWFSmeiwdrsndd0v2cEnbqmKQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <C93A34DBE97565AD96CEC321@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <CAMm+Lwia99RdyO4RFScSwCaVHLsr_BRzmXK18eUoxGFti79Vog@mail.gmail.com> <001976FFC9FE8FFCAA2E7990@JCK-EEE10> <CAMm+Lwiz1nyT6khGqa693E8Tq9Srrd3kaETRN=K0NUq-SsX1Vw@mail.gmail.com> <534FE7BC.4070002@gmx.de> <CAMm+Lwjr1dmGoKRVRvmX1fxettWEyx6sm88Ry4Ri4fzJf0ZA8Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAK3OfOh_aGr8CPpK+1x3_MgAGF9khMB4sxXoPGBD6GAjyUGrEw@mail.gmail.com> <CAMm+Lwh+RV8FfaM+R8UA9--JHkb7V2gnj0N1ZCQ_RL6LMhcoAQ@mail.gmail.com> <CALcoZioKSLxtK9APfmSqQaKWSMWFSmeiwdrsndd0v2cEnbqmKQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2014 22:34:40 -0400
Message-ID: <CAMm+LwjT3WyWMHpT4JasDddp6mhvQ+ADVZPMmjSf6sLKEfcTgQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>
To: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/urn/xxID1FLXu20T5z6hkhXJc39vE7s
Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>, urn@ietf.org, General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [urn] [apps-discuss] URNs are not URIs (another look at RFC 3986)
X-BeenThere: urn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Revisions to URN RFCs <urn.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/urn>, <mailto:urn-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/urn/>
List-Post: <mailto:urn@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:urn-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/urn>, <mailto:urn-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2014 02:34:50 -0000

On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> We can certainly use URIs. The issue here is whether we claim it has
>> 'name like' semantics or 'locator like'.
>
> Whether it's a name or a locator is not an intrinsic property of the string,
> but depends solely upon the presence or absence of a local resolution
> mechanism for that string.
>
> A string that *you* might *today* call a "name", might already be a
> "locator" to somebody who's rigged a private resolution service. Ten years
> from now, that "name" might be a "locator" to all of us.


Which is exactly what I was saying.

For example, UPC code for a can of baked beans is a URN.

But if you go to Amazon you can use it as a locator, albeit mediated
via UPS rather than TCP/IP.

-- 
Website: http://hallambaker.com/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email