W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > April 2001

Re: Proposal: 'tag' URIs

From: Michael Mealling <michael@bailey.dscga.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 11:36:19 -0400
To: "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@mysterylights.com>
Cc: uri@w3.org, Tim Kindberg <timothy@hpl.hp.com>, sandro@w3.org
Message-ID: <20010427113619.A15395@bailey.dscga.com>
On Fri, Apr 27, 2001 at 03:56:41PM +0100, Sean B. Palmer wrote:
> > Two examples of tags are tag:hpl.hp.com/1:tst.12345
> > and tag:sandro@w3c.org/2-4:my-dog.
> 
> Personally, I liked "tann:" as a scheme name; "tag:" is a very general
> scheme name, and I can forsee it wanting to be used again someday
> (maybe it has already been specified in some proprietary software).
> However, "tann:" is fairly unique, as far as I can tell.
> 
> Apart from that, plus the fact that a URN would probably be better for
> this (notwithstandig the mapping capabilities), it's a very good idea.

Same here...

> One small suspect piece from the draft:-
> 
> >     If it obtains assignment of extremelyunlikelytobeassigned.org
> >     on 2001/5/1, then it must not mint tags under extremelyunlike
> >     lytobeassigned.org/1 unless it has found substantial evidence
> >     that that name was continuously unassigned between 2001/1/1
> >     and 2001/5/1.
> 
> I think that if you cannot prove that you owned a certain domain or
> email address on a ceratin date, then you MUST not be using it,
> because there's nothing to stop other people using the same space. For
> example, *if* I owned "eutba.org" from 2-3 to 2-5 and then someone
> else picked it up on 2-7, I could claim that I could use the 2-6
> dates, and so could the new owner... the 2-6 dates should all be void.
> This should be true for any coverage or period of time, no matter how
> small. If you didn't own it on /1, then you can't use it.

Yep. That's the only part that really bugged me. I'd prefer
to have a fully qualified date there. You also need to specify which
calendar you're  using. 

> P.S. Are DNS records of who owned a domain throughout time kept
> somewhere? Otherwise, one would have a difficult time proving that
> they owned a certain domain ten years ago, or whatever.

Speaking semi-authoritatively here: they're not kept in any consistent
way. I think most companies keep their records for a few years as a simple
matter of legal prudence. But there is no permanent record of who owned
what domain on what date...

-MM

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Mealling	|      Vote Libertarian!       | www.rwhois.net/michael
Sr. Research Engineer   |   www.ga.lp.org/gwinnett     | ICQ#:         14198821
Network Solutions	|          www.lp.org          |  michaelm@netsol.com
Received on Friday, 27 April 2001 11:39:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:02 UTC