- From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
- Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 16:51:11 +0300
- To: <GK@ninebynine.org>, <dehora@eircom.net>
- Cc: <uri@w3.org>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
> -----Original Message----- > From: ext Graham Klyne [mailto:GK@ninebynine.org] > Sent: 07 July, 2003 16:05 > To: Stickler Patrick (NMP/Tampere); dehora@eircom.net > Cc: uri@w3.org; www-rdf-interest@w3.org > Subject: RE: Proposal: new top level domain '.urn' alleviates all need > for urn: URIs > > > At 12:38 07/07/03 +0300, Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com wrote: > > > But if you insist on going forward, then: > > > > > > http://urn.X.Y/ > > > > > > is a sufficient hack. > > > >I think it's a rather elegant solution, not really a hack. It > >simply uses the existing domain and subdomain name registration > >infrastructure, guidelines, and general practices to partition > >the URI space into distinct managed subsets, which is what the > >urn: URI scheme is intended to do. > > > >But it does so in a manner that exploits the deployed HTTP > >infrastructure rather than require further machinery for URI > >resolution. > > > >Had someone thought of this approach back when URNs were first > >being concieved, we'd probably have countless such HTTP-URNs > >in use today. > > FWIW, I've been doing something like this for a while, cf. > > http://id.ninebynine.org/ > http://id.mimesweeper.com/ Right. The key difference in my proposal is that for any given urn: URI, you'd have no less degree of opacity in its corresponding HTTP-URN. But technically, there is no difference. Both are simply more persistent, more opaque names that are mapped to less persistent, less opaque names. > The latter is interesting in that I did (at the time) get a > commitment from > higher management that the URI space designated would be held > immune from > re-use for any other purpose. So far, it seems to have held > through a > change of company ownership and my own transfer to other pastures. Exactly. Having a domain root that is controlled by the same organization that manages the urn: subscheme registration alleviates the danger and worry of preserving the integrity of the namespaces. Cheers, Patrick -- Patrick Stickler Nokia, Finland patrick.stickler@nokia.com I
Received on Monday, 7 July 2003 09:51:17 UTC