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

Re: URx Questions

From: Tim Kindberg <timothy@hpl.hp.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 09:16:16 -0800
Message-Id: <>
To: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>, Tim Kindberg <timothy@hpl.hp.com>, URN <URN-IETF@LISTS.NETSOL.COM>, URI <uri@w3.org>
At 12:21 PM 1/23/2002 +0200, Patrick Stickler wrote:
>With regards to temporal anchoring, 'tag:' seems to me to be
>too "mothering" and not general enough.

You seem to have missed the point of tag. Without date qualification (or 
something much more laborious), an entity that holds an authority name 
could pollute the namespace of another entity that earlier held it. The 
restriction is solely to guard against that. It is not exactly a 
resource-hungry restriction.

Of course, if you really want to, you could buy some DOIs instead (assuming 
that _they_ will always be around). But we wanted to allow individuals and 
small organisations to participate in naming at little or no cost -- that 
includes those who possess only an email address (or domain name). Email 
addresses are quite frequently given up as users change ISPs so the chances 
of someone else getting the same authority name are not negligible.

>And as has been pointed
>out, does not provide a form that garuntees against accidental
>collision within the same authority (e.g. UUID).

<repeat my earlier remarks>

>I think that the IETF should *heavily* discourage, if not disallow
>dual registration of equivalent URI and URN NID schemes.

I agree with you. Tag is not where it is by overall design but by where and 
how we thought we could add value at the time. I think it's a mess that we 
have both registrations going but 'the system' is a mess and I'm not yet 
sure what to do to right our situation. I'm hoping that one or other 
registration will reach a stage when the solution to the problem becomes clear.



Tim Kindberg

mobile systems and services lab  hewlett-packard laboratories
1501 page mill road, ms 1u-17
palo alto
ca 94304-1126

voice +1 650 857 5609
fax +1 650 857 2358
Received on Wednesday, 23 January 2002 12:16:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:04 UTC