- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2009 19:03:48 +0200
- To: "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, "Jonas Sicking" <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Cc: "Larry Masinter" <masinter@adobe.com>, public-webapps@w3.org, arun@mozilla.com
On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 18:53:32 +0200, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: > Jonas Sicking wrote: >> ... >> I think we'd really like to avoid creating a new scheme if we could >> reuse an existing one. I know Arun was looking for an existing scheme, >> but not sure if he looked at the 'urn' scheme. >> Would it need to be urn:somename:uuid though? like urn:fileid:uuid? >> ... > > What's wrong with urn:uuid, which is defined in RFC 4122 and already > cited? You need to know what the URL is for in other contexts. It seems nicer if that is explicit from the scheme rather than some additional bit of data that is attached to the uuid. -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Thursday, 8 October 2009 17:04:35 UTC