RE: URNs for 'naming authority assignment', not 'permanent'

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Larry Masinter [mailto:LMM@acm.org]
> Sent: 16 September, 2003 21:25
> To: 'Williams, Stuart'
> Cc: uri@w3.org; urn-nid@lists.verisignlabs.com; 
> leslie@thinkingcat.com;
> thiemann@acm.org
> Subject: URNs for 'naming authority assignment', not 'permanent'
> 
> When you define a URI scheme, you are expected to define the
> access semantics of the scheme -- how it is that a receiver
> of a URI in the scheme is supposed determine the resource
> that the URI identifies. For 'http', the definition URIs with
> the http scheme is in the HTTP protocol specification, and
> the definition is tied to the HTTP protocol.  (People might
> use HTTP URIs in other ways to indicate something else, but
> that use isn't part of the definition of the HTTP scheme.)

I thought this was one of the shortcomings of HTTP, that one
cannot know based on the representations one might GET what
exactly is denoted by the http: URI.

The HTTP protocol seems only to be telling you how to obtain
representations of whatever is denoted by the URI, not how to
obtain the actual semantics/denotation of the URI.

???

Patrick

--
Patrick Stickler
Nokia, Finland
patrick.stickler@nokia.com

Received on Wednesday, 17 September 2003 05:31:06 UTC