- From: Weibel,Stu <weibel@oclc.org>
- Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 10:12:30 -0500
- To: <uri@w3.org>
Larry Masinter writes: > In any case, if you don't like the proposed process, > what would you propose in its place? > This seems to me like the best we can do, given all the requirements. I'd like to have a go. Please (anyone) help me understand the requirements and design constraints. Here is my current understanding: 1. Allowing unrestricted reservation of unique provisional URI scheme tokens permits persons or organizations to speculatively reserve such tokens. Many tokens are unlikely to have much branding value (eg. mms:). Others will be desirable either because they already have brand recognition, or because they have innate semantics that are attractive and concise: (ID: DOI: DATA: are possible examples). The social and business value of reserving and protecting these tokens is potentially large. 2. Reserving a token that then lapses for whatever reason removes a potentially desirable token from consideration by others; a good policy should provide a recycling mechanism for abandoned tokens. 3. Registration and review processes are costly in proportion to the human attention they require for effectiveness. Policies, registration procedures, and review requirements must be designed to incur the minimum of human intervention consistent with effectiveness. 4. Policies should provide incentives (or at least avoid disincentives) for good net citizenship (avoiding name collisions, averting name speculation, etc.). 5.) Compliance with policies should be subject to quantitative assessment, not philosophic or ideological assessment. This constraint is in a sense a derivative of #4: negotiating ideological positions is very costly in terms of time, and occurs again and again (the ground-hog day effect). This is not to say that there are no architectural principles or technological philosophies embedded in the policies, but rather that once agreed, compliance with those principles should be determined largely algorithmically. What have I got wrong? Left out? stu Stuart Weibel Senior Research Scientist OCLC Research http://public.xdi.org/=Stuart.L.Weibel +1.614.764.6081
Received on Thursday, 20 January 2005 15:12:59 UTC