- 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