- From: Mark Needleman <markn@sirsi.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 14:43:07 -0500
- To: "'Leslie Daigle'" <leslie@thinkingcat.com>, public-uri-cg@w3.org
Leslie
this came up because of a conference call I was participating in with NISO -
Im also on the W3C URI CG and this was raised there as well - I sent a note
to the chair of the OpenURL committee about this but havent gotten a
response for him yet either
Ill let Pat continue to coordinate this from the NISO site since I think
some of what she wants to talk about is more general then OpenURL - but
there are some OpenURL specific issues that need discussion
Mark Needleman
-----Original Message-----
From: Leslie Daigle [mailto:leslie@thinkingcat.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2003 2:37 PM
To: public-uri-cg@w3.org
Subject: Re: URIs and OpenURLs (was:upcoming events for URI CG
schedule?)
Sometime ago, I got a call from Pat Harris, of NISO,
wanting to do some coordinating with IETF, W3C and
OpenURL folk over the NISO standards work in this area.
I said, sure, let's telechat. I haven't heard anything
from her in weeks (and her mail responder says she
won't be back until May 27), but I began to wonder --
has anyone from W3C-land heard from her? Anyone else
aware of an effort to have a conversation?
I'm still trying to get a grip on where the points of
overlap with teh IANA registry are (and oughtn't be).
Leslie.
Martin Duerst wrote:
>
> At 09:53 03/05/09 -0400, Ray Denenberg wrote:
>
>> I really don't think the OpenURL folks honestly believe that their
>> scheme will be adopted; I think they've put it up out of some
>> frustration and cynicism. I don't completely understand why they think
>> these things that they want to identify cannot be accomodated within
>> the URI framework either with one or two new URI schemes or new URN
>> namespace identifiers. However I suspect it is because they have
>> concluded that it is nearly impossible, or at least very difficult, to
>> get new schemes or namspaces approved.
>
>
> Hello Ray,
>
> If the OpenURL people have concluded that to register new schemes
> or URN namespaces is very difficult, then I think they are wrong.
>
> I think deployment of new schemes/namespaces is difficult, but
> that's a different issue. For registration, a decent registration
> document and some thoroughness in following through is mostly
> what is needed.
>
> So I think it would be worth to find out more about whether your
> suspicion is true, and how it could be corrected.
>
>
> Regards, Martin.
>
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"Reality:
Yours to discover."
-- ThinkingCat
Leslie Daigle
leslie@thinkingcat.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Wednesday, 21 May 2003 15:47:17 UTC