Re: Globalizing URIs

Keith Moore (
Thu, 17 Aug 1995 06:36:17 -0400

Message-Id: <>
From: Keith Moore <>
To: Martin J Duerst <>
Subject: Re: Globalizing URIs 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 17 Aug 1995 11:52:26 +0200."
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 1995 06:36:17 -0400

> >> Phew, I've been wanting to say that since I read "URN's considered 
> >> harmful".  
> Is that an existing document? If yes, where could I find it?

(it missed the internet-draft deadline at the last IETF by a few
hours, will be re-submitted soon with slight changes and a 
different name)

> >That is, a user ought to be able to know whether a link is likely to
> >break before he puts it in his hotlist.
> Persistence is not just a yes/no decision. 

I agree with this.  But I've been thinking lately about what it takes
to make a document id persistent for the long term, and have concluded
that it requires some prior planning (where do you put it so that it
will continue to be accessible) and some committment to providing
the necessary resources.  Also, sometimes an author knows that a 
document is going to be revised many times, and thus references to
(say) the third chapter of that document aren't likely to be useful
for long, because the third chapter will sooner or later be something
completely different than it originally was.

I'm not sure how best to indicate this, and am interested in seeing
others' ideas on the topic.

> Most of the "missing link" problems are due to a) the things really becomming
> obsolete and b) the initial errors and slopyness of server administrators
> and document writers that take their time to realize that they better
> had to think twice before deciding on/changing a domain name or the
> location and name of a doument. 

I don't disagree with you, but are you sure?  I haven't seen any 
measurements on it, and this strikes me as the sort of case where
one's intuition is likely to be wrong.  Are there any studies on
why links go bad?