W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org > December 1996


From: Terry Allen <tallen@fsc.fujitsu.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 1996 13:11:32 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199612022111.NAA14582@ishtar.fsc.fujitsu.com>
To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
in response to Lee:

what's wanted is persistent naming.  

| > If the defined method of resolution is "resolve as URNs", which
| > various systems may do variously but with the same results (unless
| > some succeed and some fail), does that suffice for you? 
| For me it doesn't, because
| (1) an FPI isn't (last time a checked) a full valid URN (e.g. lacks the
|     urn: prefix)

"urn:" is now considered a matter of religious choice.  If you like,
when you send it to your URN resolver (outside your XML system)
you can prepend "urn:fpi:"

| (2) you can use URNs in the SYSTEM identifiers if you like.

Up to the specification to say, isn't it?

| There is obviously a lot of emotional attachment to formal public identifiers.

"Emotional" is out of order.  There is clearly attachment to something that
people have found to work.  They are also disturbed at the thought that
they will have only URLs to work with.

| In some cases perhaps it's because people think that resolving an FPI always
| gets you the same data,  It doesn't.  There isn't even a resolution mechanism

Resolving a URN always gives you the same data by the namer's definition
of "same."  That's the way they're defined.

    Terry Allen    Fujitsu Software Corp.    tallen@fsc.fujitsu.com
"In going on with these experiments, how many pretty systems do we build,
 which we soon find outselves obliged to destroy?" - Benjamin Franklin
  A Davenport Group Sponsor:  http://www.ora.com/davenport/index.html
Received on Monday, 2 December 1996 16:12:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:25:05 UTC