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

Re: Proposal: 'tag' URIs

From: Tim Kindberg <timothy@hpl.hp.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 09:06:07 -0700
Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.1.20010427085721.02b7c568@hplex1.hpl.hp.com>
To: "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@mysterylights.com>, <uri@w3.org>, "Tim Kindberg" <timothy@hpl.hp.com>
Cc: <sandro@w3.org>
At 03:56 PM 4/27/2001 +0100, Sean B. Palmer wrote:
>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.
>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.

The intention is that an entity can mint tags on a date d when it was 
unassigned, if it became the assignee of the authority name 
_immediately_  after the continuous period of unassignment in which d 
falls. I still think that that is good as a logical definition. The 
question is whther there are good enough practical criteria for using it. 
Are you questioning whether there can be evidence that the name was 
unassigned immediately after the first entity ceased to be the assignee? 
The someone who picked it up on 2-7 would have to have evidence that it was 
unassigned. We're positing that such evidence may become available.


>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.

At whois.org there is something called a 'deleted domain search'. I suspect 
that someone, somewhere, has all the requisite information to make 
'unassignment on date d' a verifiable predicate.

Thanks,

Tim.

Tim Kindberg

internet & mobile systems lab  hewlett-packard laboratories
1501 page mill road, ms 1u-17
palo alto
ca 94304-1126
usa

www.champignon.net/TimKindberg/
timothy@hpl.hp.com
voice +1 650 857 5609
fax +1 650 857 2358
Received on Friday, 27 April 2001 12:06:21 UTC

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