- From: Terry Allen <terry@ora.com>
- Date: Mon, 26 Jun 1995 07:43:17 -0700
- To: liberte@ncsa.uiuc.edu (Daniel LaLiberte), uri@bunyip.com
>Is there sufficient advantage for the constraint that a resource have only one name per naming scheme? Tools (such as browsers and caches) should be made to work with the knowledge that resources do not necessarily have a single name, by perhaps remembering the canonical name for a resource in addition to its alternative names. You can't ensure that a resource will be given only one URN per naming scheme, so it is pointless to require it. The "canonical name" mentioned would have to be ... just exactly a URN, so that's no out. Comparisons are presumably to be made on (what it is hoped are) different, um, encodings(?) of the same URN. Regards, -- Terry Allen (terry@ora.com) O'Reilly & Associates, Inc. Editor, Digital Media Group 101 Morris St. Sebastopol, Calif., 95472 A Davenport Group sponsor. For information on the Davenport Group see ftp://ftp.ora.com/pub/davenport/README.html or http://www.ora.com/davenport/README.html
Received on Monday, 26 June 1995 10:46:32 UTC