- From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@mysterylights.com>
- Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 15:49:34 +0100
- To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@ebuilt.com>
- Cc: <uri@w3.org>
> ISBN makes for excelent Names, but they are explicitly > forbidden to be "URN" [...] That's interesting; a number of people seem to not be under that impression. For example:- http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hakala-isbn-01.txt Hmm... this is what it says under "Identifier persistence considerations":- The ISBN accompanies a publication from its production onwards. It is persistent; ISBN once given - if correct - will never leave the publication. Heh, that's a bit of a fudge, isn't it? Note that according to [1] this internet draft is listed as being of status "RFC-EDITOR", which apparently means:- RFC-EDITOR -- The IESG has approved the internet-draft and the document is sitting in the RFC Editor's queue Which I read as meaning that anytime soon, this document could go to RFC. ISBN is also not listed under Dan Connolly's list of URI schemes [1], but as that list is missing quite a few schemes, and is in no way "official", that's not much of an indication that it isn't a URI scheme. Of course, it really doesn't matter either way. That the RFC's don't correspond to "TimBL's, Dan Connolly's, or my [RF's] own design notes" is a bit worrying, but that will take time, effort, and a whole lot of discussions... [1] http://uri.net/urn-nid-status.html [2] http://www.w3.org/Addressing/schemes -- Kindest Regards, Sean B. Palmer @prefix : <http://webns.net/roughterms/> . :Sean :hasHomepage <http://purl.org/net/sbp/> .
Received on Monday, 27 August 2001 10:49:54 UTC