To: firstname.lastname@example.org Cc: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, In-Reply-To: Tim Berners-Lee's message of Wed, 11 Mar 1992 04:07:28 -0800 <9203111107.AA28084@nxoc01.cern.ch> Subject: Re: Draft: Universal Document Identifiers From: Larry Masinter <email@example.com> Message-Id: <92Mar11.firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1992 10:15:21 PST Um, I think when I tell you about a document, I can tell you: a)Some attributes about it that you can remember and use for finding it again. b)its signature/fingerprint/checksum whatever This helps you know whether you already have exactly what I'm referring to or can get it more locally. c)some information about where I think you can get it and how d)a set of instructions you can use for getting it. So I have a book here. a) It is called "Programming Perl", by Larry Wall and Randal L. Schwartz. b) it is ISBN 0-937175-64-1. c) it is part of the O'Reilly & Associatiates series of Unix books, try a technical library d) If it were available for FTP, it would be in //ora.com/nuts/books/perl/1991-edition. The last two are a little strained in the analogy; don't jump on the analogy, please, I just want to point out that it is reasonable and customary to supply *MORE THAN ONE* of unique identifier, serial number, access path, common attributes, etc.