- 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