revised URC scenarios draft

Ronald E. Daniel (rdaniel@acl.lanl.gov)
Fri, 24 Mar 1995 12:29:33 -0700


From: "Ronald E. Daniel" <rdaniel@acl.lanl.gov>
Message-Id: <9503241229.ZM21805@idaknow.acl.lanl.gov>
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 1995 12:29:33 -0700
To: uri@bunyip.com
Subject: revised URC scenarios draft

I have submitted a revised version of the draft "URC Scenarios and
Requirements" to the Internet Drafts editors. Rather than clot the list with
the text, go to <URL:http://www.acl.lanl.gov/URI/Scenarios/> to get text,
PostScript, or LaTEX versions.

What's different?

Scenarios are divided into User, Provider, and (new) 3'rd Party scenarios.
Searching, SOAPs, alternate locations go into 3'rd party. A new scenario about
librarians developing a high quality URC also goes into the 3'rd party section.
SOAPs has been modified slightly to indicate that it is a special case of a
general annotation capability.

A micro-scenario about using a less capable browser has been added, along with
the resulting requirement that the URC server be able to emit the URC in
multiple syntaxes.

The first publishing scenario has been modified to show that there are going to
be lots of ways to publish, different times to bind a URN to a resource, and
sometimes multiple URNs assgned to a resource as a consequence of the manner in
which publication is performed.

Still to do - a proper job of figuring out who signs what if we want digital
signatures to work when publishers, servers, etc. can all come and go. A better
treatment of general annotations.

Now it is time to go to fine meetings for my real job. :-(




-- 
Ron Daniel Jr.                email: rdaniel@acl.lanl.gov
Advanced Computing Lab        voice: (505) 665-0597
MS B-287  TA-3  Bldg. 2011      fax: (505) 665-4939
Los Alamos National Lab        http://www.acl.lanl.gov/~rdaniel/
Los Alamos, NM,  87545    tautology: "Conformity is very popular"