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

Re: Unseasonal, maybe: But what is the URI for "null"?

From: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 17:15:05 -0500
Message-Id: <200201022159.QAA3297217@smtp2.mail.iamworld.net>
To: Michael Mealling <michael@neonym.net>
Cc: uri@w3.org, tony_hammond@harcourt.com
At 01:49 PM 2002-01-02 , Michael Mealling wrote:
>On Wed, Jan 02, 2002 at 01:35:20PM -0500, Al Gilman wrote:
>> At 08:47 AM 2001-12-23 , tony_hammond@harcourt.com wrote:
>> There are many fictive URIs one can coin using the reserved domain names of
>> RFC-2606, such as
>> 
>> <cid:garbageStringOfYourChoice@mail.example.net> and
>> <urn:example.org:topic:aspect:nit>.
>
>Just so we squish these when they come up, that URN is invalid. 
>URN's are specifically disallowed form having '.' in their namespace ID.
>The only allowed characters are A-Z, a-z and '-'. You are strongly
>discouraged from using NIDs that even appear to look like domain-names.
>IMHO, urn:example:topic:bla would be better....
>

Sorry, point taken.  Make that <urn:example.invalid:foo:bar:baz>.  But we
don't
want to limit ourselves to broken examples.  So building on RFC-2606 is not
cool by best URN practice.

Is there any "writing of normative record" reserving this use you suggested of
'example' as an NID?  Or any other effective alternative?

Al

>-MM
>
>
>
>-- 
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
>Michael Mealling |      Vote Libertarian!       | urn:pin:1
>michael@neonym.net      |                              |
<http://www.neonym.net/>http://www.neonym.net
>  
Received on Wednesday, 2 January 2002 16:59:49 GMT

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