Fw: State of play wrt RFC 2056

Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress writes:
 > I would like to hear from anyone who can share experience with the
 > implementation and/or use of  Z39.50 URLs.  (See
 > http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2056.html)
 > 
 > The W3C Technical Architecture Committee is studying the tradeoffs
 > between http: and non http: URI schemes for identifiers, and
 > contacted me (as one of the RFC editors).

But the z39.50s: and z39.50r: URI schemes are very explicitly
locations -- even the title of the RFC (Uniform Resource Locators for
Z39.50) states that.  In other words, their whole purpose is to be
actionable, and they are not intended to be used as identifiers.

 _/|_	 ___________________________________________________________________
/o ) \/  Mike Taylor    <mike@indexdata.com>    http://www.miketaylor.org.uk
)_v__/\  "Although robust enough for general use, adventures into the
	 esoteric periphery of the C shell may reveal unexpected quirks"
	 -- csh(1) manual, SunOS 4.1.1