W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > April 2002

Re: FW: I-D ACTION:draft-masinter-dated-uri-03.txt

From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 16:39:38 +0100
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020429163401.03c10ec0@joy.songbird.com>
To: <LMM@acm.org>
Cc: <uri@w3.org>
At 10:58 AM 4/26/02 -0700, Larry Masinter wrote:
>I hope I've addressed the comments I've gotten on this.
>If you said something and think I ignored you, please
>let me know, I might have lost some comments.
>
>I picked "uri@w3.org" as the main list to discuss this
>draft on for public comments.

Larry,

I think this echoes a comment Al Gilman made, though I'll suggest a simpler 
solution.

I think the definition:
[[
    The meaning of a duri is "the resource (or fragment) that was
    identified by the <encoded-URI> (after hex decoding) at the very
    first instant of the date(time) given".

    For example, 'urn:duri:2001:http://www.ietf.org' is a persistent
    identifier to 'http://www.ietf.org' as of the very first moment of
    the year 2001.  A duri may not be a resource locator in a practical
    sense, because the time of location has passed.  However, is an
    acceptable resource identifier, and fulfills all of the requirements
    for URNs [7].
]]

has some surprising consequences.  Imagine I publish a daily web journal, 
at http://dailynews.example.org/.  Intuitively, I think that

   urn:duri:20010429:http://dailynews.example.org/

should refer to the issue that was published some time on 29-April.  But 
according to your definition, it refers to a 28-April issue.

My suggested change is
[[
    The meaning of a duri is "the resource (or fragment) that was
    identified by the <encoded-URI> (after hex decoding) at the very
    last instant of the date(time) given".
...^^^^
]]

#g


-------------------
Graham Klyne
<GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Monday, 29 April 2002 11:39:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 13 January 2011 12:15:30 GMT