- From: Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu>
- Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 16:50:59 -0400
- To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@kiwi.ics.uci.edu>
- cc: "Vaha-Sipila Antti (NMP)" <antti.vaha-sipila@nmp.nokia.com>, URI distribution list <uri@Bunyip.Com>, moore@cs.utk.edu
> There is only one naming authority (partitioned into sub-authorities) > for the entire telephone namespace. Therefore, it makes sense to only > have one URL scheme for phone names. The action to take (fax, talk, > etc.) should be independent of the URI. Ahem... "There is only one naming authority (partitioned into sub-authorities) for the entire Internet DNS namespace. Therefore, it makes sense to only have one URL scheme for DNS names. The action to take (http GET, http POST, ftp RETR, ftp STOR, ftp LIST, ftp *, telnet, mailto, ...) should be independent of the URI." (cough) > On the contrary. What you described is a phone number with a > null national/regional context. So define a representation of such > and put it in place of the national/regional context. > > Phone numbers are a hierarchical structure. You can tell that by the > way they are abbreviated in context. In some sense and under some circumstances phone numbers are a hierarchy, but the divisions of hierarchy are not always intended to be exposed, they're not consistent from one place to another, and are subject to change. Furthermore, the mapping from a local phone number to a global number often involves a more complex operation than simply prepending some additional digits. So I see little value in trying to make phone numbers fit into the URI notion of hierarchy. Keith
Received on Saturday, 27 June 1998 16:55:18 UTC