- From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 16:39:38 +0100
- To: <LMM@acm.org>
- Cc: <uri@w3.org>
At 10:58 AM 4/26/02 -0700, Larry Masinter wrote: >I hope I've addressed the comments I've gotten on this. >If you said something and think I ignored you, please >let me know, I might have lost some comments. > >I picked "uri@w3.org" as the main list to discuss this >draft on for public comments. Larry, I think this echoes a comment Al Gilman made, though I'll suggest a simpler solution. I think the definition: [[ The meaning of a duri is "the resource (or fragment) that was identified by the <encoded-URI> (after hex decoding) at the very first instant of the date(time) given". For example, 'urn:duri:2001:http://www.ietf.org' is a persistent identifier to 'http://www.ietf.org' as of the very first moment of the year 2001. A duri may not be a resource locator in a practical sense, because the time of location has passed. However, is an acceptable resource identifier, and fulfills all of the requirements for URNs [7]. ]] has some surprising consequences. Imagine I publish a daily web journal, at http://dailynews.example.org/. Intuitively, I think that urn:duri:20010429:http://dailynews.example.org/ should refer to the issue that was published some time on 29-April. But according to your definition, it refers to a 28-April issue. My suggested change is [[ The meaning of a duri is "the resource (or fragment) that was identified by the <encoded-URI> (after hex decoding) at the very last instant of the date(time) given". ...^^^^ ]] #g ------------------- Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Monday, 29 April 2002 11:39:16 UTC