Re: <draft-ietf-uri-resource-names-03.txt> to be deleted.

Mitra (
Sat, 17 Jun 1995 14:07:39 -0700

Date: Sat, 17 Jun 1995 14:07:39 -0700
Message-Id: <ac088efc02021004d825@[]>
To: "Ronald E. Daniel" <>,
From: (Mitra)
Subject: Re:  <draft-ietf-uri-resource-names-03.txt> to be deleted.

At 5:06 PM 6/17/95, Ronald E. Daniel wrote:
>> Since the IETF expiration process moves faster than the IETF itself, I've
>> put a copy off my home page <>
>Are you saying that you are providing a home for your URN draft instead
>of resubmitting it? Perhaps Larry will correct me if I am wrong, but my
>impression of the IETF process is that the group will not consider
>your approach to URNs if you have allowed the draft to expire.  While
>it provides an easy way to trim the list of competing URN proposals,
>standardization through attrition is not as satisfying as
>standardization through vigorous debate.

Standardization comes by wittling down the list of contenders, not
continuously extending it. The proposal was the result of merging a number
of competing proposals. Debate is useless, if - as for the IETF version of
URL's - it takes so long that the industry ignores it.

>Even if you don't want to change any technical details, surely you can
>find some parts of the prose that could be improved or expanded upon
>enough to justify a resubmission.  If nothing else, the draft could be
>enhanced to discuss its position on URCs and address the requirements
>in the URC scenarios draft.

I have nothing to add to it, maybe Chris or Michael want to revive it.
I still believe it addresses the problems that are still evident in more
recent proposals.

- Mitra

Worlds Inc                                                (415)281-1308
<>                         fax (415)284-9483