- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@ebuilt.com>
- Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2001 23:31:57 -0700
- To: "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@mysterylights.com>
- Cc: uri@w3.org
> Consider the ISBN scheme. Roy Fielding argued that because ISBN schemes are > reused, they cannot be URNs, but can be URIs. Of course, they *can* be URNs > because the persistence of an ISBN identifer is good enough to be used... > an ISBN identifier persistently identifies the book that most commonly has > that identifier printed on it somewhere. It is the identifier of a > currently published book using that identifier. No, that's not what I was talking about. The term "URN" refers to what is in the URN RFCs published by the IETF, not the generic notion of Names that you will often find in TimBL's, Dan Connolly's, or my own design notes. ISBN makes for excelent Names, but they are explicitly forbidden to be "URN" as described in the IETF RFCs because the naming authority does not guarantee their persistence over all time (not even over a short time). I don't think that is a good thing, but I try not to mix terminology once its been put in somebody else's proposed standard. ....Roy
Received on Monday, 27 August 2001 02:35:03 UTC