- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 08:48:02 -0700
- To: uri@w3.org
Jeff et al, I think that comment may have been misattributed? I don't remember saying anything about squid... Someone told me it may have been Michael Mealling? Cheers, On Fri, Jun 08, 2001 at 12:10:38AM -0700, Jeff.Hodges@kingsmountain.com wrote: > mnot@mnot.net said in the minutes of the FURI BOF [1]: > > Mark Nottingham: At the time URNs were looked at in squid, > > registration had not been approved. There are documents that need to be > > read before saying URNs don't work. They work for me, I'm releasing a > > product in mid May. > > Mark -- w.r.t. the above quote -- can you (now) describe how "the product" > uses URNs? Is it using ad-hoc, informal, or formal URN Namespace > Identifier(s)? How is it making use of and leveraging URNs? What is it about > the resources/artifacts being identified via the URNs that makes URNs more > applicable than say using a URL-style URI (i.e. an existing URI "scheme"), or > inventing a new URI scheme (having different semantics than URNs')? > > thanks, > > JeffH > > [1] Future of Uniform Resource Identifiers BOF (furi) > [50th IETF, Minneapolis MN, Mar-2001] > http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/01mar/ietf50-39.htm#TopOfPage > > > > -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Wednesday, 13 June 2001 11:48:16 UTC