- From: Hammond, Tony (ELSLON) <T.Hammond@elsevier.com>
- Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2003 10:01:21 +0100
- To: "'Roy T. Fielding'" <fielding@apache.org>, "'uri@w3.org'" <uri@w3.org>
I didn't see any feedback on this comment I posted earlier so am reposting the comment. It seems significant and worthy of some reply. The following passage from end 2nd para, section 1.1.3, strikes me as very peculiar: 'This specification deprecates use of the term "URN" for anything but URIs in the "urn" scheme [RFC2141]. This specification also deprecates the term "URL".' Given that a URI scheme may be classified as a 'locator', a 'name' or both, how can the term 'URL' be deprecated while maintaining currency of the the term 'URN'? This seems to introduce an imbalance into the glossary of terms. Surely in the contemporary view the only term of any significance is 'URI'. IMO the term 'URN' should be deprecated wholesale along with the term 'URL' otherwise we introduce an inequitable skewering of the URI space. The 'urn' scheme just marks out a certain class of URIs which have a particular semantics - i.e. 'persistence'. Nothing more. Cheers, Tony Tony Hammond Advanced Technology Group, Elsevier Ltd 32 Jamestown Road, London, NW1 7BY, UK <tel:+44-20-7424-4445> <mailto:t.hammond@elsevier.com>
Received on Thursday, 5 June 2003 05:01:49 UTC