W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > October 2003

Re: uri, urn and info

From: Michael Mealling <michael@neonym.net>
Date: 07 Oct 2003 18:29:37 -0400
To: Eric Hellman <eric@openly.com>
Cc: uri@w3.org
Message-Id: <1065565776.6119.203.camel@blackdell.neonym.net>

On Tue, 2003-10-07 at 17:45, Eric Hellman wrote:
> urn
> rigorous requirements but the real hurdle with urn is to get IETF 
> consensus. 

Which is proving to be a fairly easy thing to do. At present we have the
following registered IDs:
IETF       [RFC2648] 
PIN        [RFC3043]	
ISSN       [RFC3044]
OID        [RFC3061]
NEWSML     [RFC3085]
OASIS      [RFC3121]
XMLORG     [RFC3120]
publicid   [RFC3151]
ISBN       [RFC3187]
NBN        [RFC3188]
WEB3D      [RFC3541]
MPEG       [RFC3614]
mace       [RFC-hazelton-mace-urn-namespace-02.txt]
fipa       [RFC3616]
swift      [RFC3615]

I submitted the 'liberty' NID proposal and the process once I submitted
it to the NID list was completely comment free. The time between request
and approval was about 1 month total. The RFC Editor will probably
publish it shortly. Its a heck of a lot faster than the MIME types
registration process. ;-)

> IETF lapses most URN proposals and doesn't promote or use 
> the ones it does.

What do you mean by 'lapses'? All of the proposals except 'tag' and some
where the project dropped off the face of the earth have made it through
the process. The IETF is using the 'ietf' space fairly heavily,
especially as it concerns the XML registry defined in
draft-mealling-iana-xmlns-registry-05.txt. Presently the standards
waiting on is publication are simple, provreg, and sipping (those are
the ones the RFC Editor has, there are more I think).

The identifiers have been assigned and the processes are in place. If
there is some confusion on that process let me know and I'll make sure
it gets clarified or straightened out....

-MM
Received on Tuesday, 7 October 2003 18:30:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 13 January 2011 12:15:32 GMT