W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > August 2001

Re: draft-masinter-dated-uri-00.txt

From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@mysterylights.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 15:49:34 +0100
Message-ID: <013401c12f07$9caf5f60$b4dc93c3@Palmer>
To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@ebuilt.com>
Cc: <uri@w3.org>
> ISBN makes for excelent Names, but they are explicitly
> forbidden to be "URN" [...]

That's interesting; a number of people seem to not be under that
impression. For example:-

   http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hakala-isbn-01.txt

Hmm... this is what it says under "Identifier persistence considerations":-

   The ISBN accompanies a publication from its production
   onwards. It is persistent; ISBN once given - if correct - will
   never leave the publication.

Heh, that's a bit of a fudge, isn't it? Note that according to [1] this
internet draft is listed as being of status "RFC-EDITOR", which apparently
means:-

   RFC-EDITOR -- The IESG has approved the internet-draft
   and the document is sitting in the RFC Editor's queue

Which I read as meaning that anytime soon, this document could go to RFC.

ISBN is also not listed under Dan Connolly's list of URI schemes [1], but
as that list is missing quite a few schemes, and is in no way "official",
that's not much of an indication that it isn't a URI scheme.

Of course, it really doesn't matter either way. That the RFC's don't
correspond to "TimBL's, Dan Connolly's, or my [RF's] own design notes" is a
bit worrying, but that will take time, effort, and a whole lot of
discussions...

[1] http://uri.net/urn-nid-status.html
[2] http://www.w3.org/Addressing/schemes

--
Kindest Regards,
Sean B. Palmer
@prefix : <http://webns.net/roughterms/> .
:Sean :hasHomepage <http://purl.org/net/sbp/> .
Received on Monday, 27 August 2001 10:49:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 13 January 2011 12:15:29 GMT