- From: Hammond, Tony <T.Hammond@nature.com>
- Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2004 10:00:32 +0100
- To: 'Larry Masinter' <LMM@acm.org>, 'Eric Hellman' <eric@openly.com>
- Cc: uri@w3.org
> I think the position is rather > narrower: the argument is that there is little utility in > assigned-name systems such as "urn:", and those uses would be > as well served by using "http:". This touches to the heart of the problem with URI. Is it scoped by utility or identity? It should be noted that the transport of identity is already a considerable utility within an information space - especially one that seeks to be global. Tony ps/ Am heartened by the phrasing 'assigned-name systems such as "urn:"' - which explicitly recognises that 'urn' is not the only 'assigned-name system'. ******************************************************************************** DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is confidential and should not be used by anyone who is not the original intended recipient. If you have received this e-mail in error please inform the sender and delete it from your mailbox or any other storage mechanism. Neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its agents accept liability for any statements made which are clearly the sender's own and not expressly made on behalf of Macmillan Publishers Limited or one of its agents. Please note that neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its agents accept any responsibility for viruses that may be contained in this e-mail or its attachments and it is your responsibility to scan the e-mail and attachments (if any). No contracts may be concluded on behalf of Macmillan Publishers Limited or its agents by means of e-mail communication. Macmillan Publishers Limited Registered in England and Wales with registered number 785998 Registered Office Brunel Road, Houndmills, Basingstoke RG21 6XS ********************************************************************************
Received on Wednesday, 8 September 2004 09:01:05 UTC