Re: date in URN

Larry Masinter (masinter@parc.xerox.com)
Fri, 23 Jun 1995 08:11:18 PDT


To: peterd@bunyip.com
Cc: uri@bunyip.com
In-Reply-To: peterd@bunyip.com's message of Fri, 23 Jun 1995 08:06:44 -0700 <95Jun23.080652pdt.2762@golden.parc.xerox.com>
Subject: Re: date in URN
From: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
Message-Id: <95Jun23.081124pdt.2761@golden.parc.xerox.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 1995 08:11:18 PDT

>>>>> On Fri, 23 Jun 1995 08:06:44 -0700, peterd@bunyip.com said:
> Larry Masinter wrote:
> |
> |>The more I think about it, the more convinced I am that if URNs are to be as
> |>persistent as possible, that they should be numeric (or alphanumeric codes
> |>like the LoC numbers or British/Canadian postal code system).  If you use
> |>human-readable names like "proper" or "ibm" people will get emotional and/or
> |>possessive about them, making it much harder to prevent the URNs containing
> |>them from changing over time.

but actually, I didn't write that, even though I think there is a
serious issue of longevity of undated human-readable names.