From: "Ron Daniel Jr." <firstname.lastname@example.org> Message-Id: <9506131000.ZM1832538@macrdan.acl.lanl.gov> Date: Tue, 13 Jun 1995 10:00:35 -0600 In-Reply-To: Michael.Mealling@oit.gatech.edu (Michael Mealling) To: Michael.Mealling@oit.gatech.edu (Michael Mealling), Subject: Re: URC spec Cc: email@example.com Thus spoke Michael Mealling: (at least on Jun 13 at 9:36am) > Michael Shapiro said this: > > There is an implied assumption in the SGML-based URC > > specifiction that URNs resolve to URCs. I think that this is a > > fundamental mistake. URNs should not be required to resolve to > > URCs. They should be allowed to resolve to any resource. > > But you will also notice that Ron has several different types of > URC syntax. In this case we could just as easily state a reverseal > of the above: Anything that is returned during the resolution of > a URN can be considered a URC. > > A URL all by itself is just a very small URC. A null string is > just a null URC. > > Its just semantics.... Michael Mealling's response was pretty much along the lines of my thinking. If a list of URLs were returned, that would be just one form of URC. Lots of things could be returned and considered a URC. Michael Shapiro's comment seems to be that we should allow the URN to resolve directly to the named resource, without an intermediate step of the URC. This is where we have a fundamental disagreement. I think that resolving a string to a resource is the role of the URL. URNs are supposed to isolate us a bit from the resource so that we can easily move it around, etc. I certainly think we should insulate the user from this extra step, but I think that the user's agent has to see it in order for us to achieve the goals of URNs. Anyone else on the list care to voice their opinon on this point? -- Ron Daniel Jr. email: firstname.lastname@example.org Advanced Computing Lab voice: (505) 665 0597 MS B287 fax: (505) 665 4939 Los Alamos National Laboratory http://www.acl.lanl.gov/~rdaniel/ Los Alamos, NM 87545 tautology:"Conformity is very popular"