RE: "lid" URLs

From: Dan Zigmond (djz@corp.webtv.net)
Date: Sat, Apr 15 2000

  • Next message: Philipp Hoschka: "Submit TV-URI work to IESG ? (was: Re: "lid" URLs)"

    Message-ID: <15AAE0EBDCC9D1119FFA00805F85642E07B1A07B@WNI-MSG-02>
    From: Dan Zigmond <djz@corp.webtv.net>
    To: "'Larry Masinter'" <LM@att.com>, uri@w3.org, www-tv@w3.org
    Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2000 10:57:29 -0700
    Subject: RE: "lid" URLs
    
    Agreed.  We were a little careless in our terminology (as others also
    pointed out), and I just haven't gotten around to revising the drafts.
    
    	Dan
    
    
    --------------------------------------------------- 
    Dan Zigmond 
    Senior Group Manager, Client Technologies 
    WebTV Networks, Inc. 
    djz@corp.webtv.net 
    --------------------------------------------------- 
    
    
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Larry Masinter [mailto:LM@att.com]
    Sent: Saturday, April 15, 2000 10:33 AM
    To: uri@w3.org; www-tv@w3.org
    Subject: "lid" URLs
    
    
    (someone) wrote me:
    
    > I've just noticed a couple of Internet drafts that propose and refer to a
    > URI scheme called lid:
    >
    >    draft-blackketter-lid-00.txt
    >    draft-finseth-isanlid-00.txt
    >
    > I have two thoughts:
    >
    > (a) these lid:'s look more like URNs to me
    >
    > (b) the lid draft claims that lid:'s are simulatneously URIs and URNs, but
    > they don't conform to URN syntax (in not having a leading "urn:" or
    > namespace identifier parts).
    
    I don't have a problem with URL-schemes that have URN-like semantics,
    since there are enough of them already (cid, news, etc.). I think the
    wording (saying that lid URLs are URNs) probably needs to change, since
    it just adds confusion.
    
    
    Larry