W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > March 2004

Re: info scheme has no authority component, why?

From: <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 15:20:07 -0500
To: "Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress" <rden@loc.gov>
Cc: uri@w3.org
Message-ID: <20040315202007.GR3816@skunk.reutershealth.com>

Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress scripsit:

> But nobody (person or agent) has the authority to coins an info:lccn
> uri.  A given string either is or isn't one: if it is of the form
> 'info:lccn/xxx' and there exists an lccn that normalizes to 'xxx' then
> it is, if not it isn't. And in the latter case, in the future when
> such an lccn does exists then that string becomes an info:lccn uri
> automatically, upon assignment of the lccn.  So I'm not sure what an
> authority component adds.

You talk as if LCCNs grew on trees, literally.  The authority to coin an
info:lccn URI is one and the same with the authority to assign the
corresponding LCCN, just as is the case with urn:isbn URIs, since the
meaning of the URI is tied to the meaning of the "number".  In effect, then,
the authority component of LCCNs is "lccn".

-- 
Evolutionary psychology is the theory           John Cowan
that men are nothing but horn-dogs,             http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
and that women only want them for their money.  http://www.reutershealth.com
        --Susan McCarthy (adapted)              jcowan@reutershealth.com
Received on Monday, 15 March 2004 15:20:15 GMT

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