Re: [urn] Re: Proposal: urn:local: namespace for context-scoped identifiers

On 2026-01-26, Melvin Carvalho wrote:

> I agree with Martin that this seems to be a poor fit for the URN 
> properties. If something like urn:local:version does not mean the same 
> thing in all contexts, this doesn't seem like it's a good candidate 
> for using a URN.

I would agree as well, but for another reason: the URN namespace is by 
definition *universal* and *immutable*.  It's not an address, but a 
persistent *name*, perhaps resolvable to an address, or not.

In this hierarchy of naming schemes we have, URN's are the highest and 
most asbstract of them. They name topics. Below them are URI's, which 
name resources which have something to do with those topics. Then below 
those are URL's, which tell where those resources can be found. So, 
URN's are two levels of abstraction removed from a weblink. They are by 
design so, and should be kept there.

I for instance can refer to myself as urn:oid:1.3.6.1.4.1.12798.1.2049.1 
. That's not about my site, not about my online presence, but me as 
myself, as a person. Having procured an OID prefix via IKI ry, here in 
Finland, I have numbered myself, and that number is then immutable. I 
have permanently plaecd myself within on ISO/ITU-sanctioned and 
IETF-embedded namespace, as a *concept*.

Please enumerate yourselves and everything under your control like I did 
years back. Because however bureaucratic the ISO might be, in their 
namespace management they did something right. In ASN.1 they even 
encoded this hierarchical namespace of theirs pretty much right, and 
concisely. And then, IETF has even come to embed all this into their URN 
syntax, in textual form.

That's nice work, and should be respected. Definitely not to be redone, 
without very good reason.
-- 
Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy - decoy@iki.fi, http://decoy.iki.fi/front
+358-40-3648785, 025E D175 ABE5 027C 9494 EEB0 E090 8BA9 0509 85C2