W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > March 2011

Re: [urn] fragment identifiers

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 13:43:10 +0100
Message-ID: <4D78C75E.3090806@gmx.de>
To: Juha Hakala <juha.hakala@helsinki.fi>
CC: "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, "uri@w3.org" <uri@w3.org>, urn@ietf.org
On 10.03.2011 13:28, Juha Hakala wrote:
> ...
> Persistent identifiers will be used for multiple purposes, and by the
> time we assign e.g. a URN to a resource, we have no idea which
> resolution services will be needed in the (distant) future. Lifetime of
> a PID may be centuries; applications and the functionality they offer
> will change many times during such a period. And eventually even the
> copyright protection of a document will expire ;-).
> ...

I think that statement in itself rules out use of fragment identifiers. 
At least if you want to stay in sync with the URI spec (RFC 3986).

> Retrieving a representation is one the key resolution services supplied
> already. But there does not need to be a 1:1 relation between a URN (or
> any other persistent identifier) and the URI (URL/URLs) it maps to via a
> resolution service.
> ...

Even if there *was* a one-to-one mapping, the representation could still 
vary based on request header fields (content negotiation), and also over 

Best regards, Julian
Received on Thursday, 10 March 2011 12:43:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:14 UTC