- From: Aaron Swartz <aswartz@upclink.com>
- Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2001 01:18:25 -0500
- To: "Larry Masinter - LMM@acm.org" <lmnet@attglobal.net>
- Cc: <uri@w3.org>
On Friday, August 24, 2001, at 12:47 PM, Larry Masinter -
LMM@acm.org wrote:
> I wrote this up for discussion purposes, as a response
> to some of the discussion about URNs, URIs, and the
> difference between abstractions and resources that
> describe them.
Do you plan to publish this as an RFC?
There's a typo in the paragraph beginning:
So "urn:duri:2001:http://www.ietf.org" can be used to designate the
Internet Engineering Task Force organization...
You need to s/duri/tdb/
In lieu of
<urn:duri:19990114:http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml-names> you may
want to cite <http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-xml-names-19990114>.
Can you explain why you didn't?
Using:
urn:duri:2000:urn:ietf:std:50
to refer to "the document that was STD 50 that was in effect as
of the first instant of 2000" seems problematic to me, since
that URN represented the same resource in 2000 as it would at
any other time, namely the IETF STD 50 document. You seem to be
implying that the use of duri changes the semantics of the
resource involved. Is this so?
--
"Aaron Swartz" | Blogspace
<mailto:me@aaronsw.com> | <http://blogspace.com/about/>
<http://www.aaronsw.com/> | weaving the two-way web
Received on Sunday, 26 August 2001 02:18:40 UTC