FW: Announcement: A revised I-D for "info"

May be of interest to this list. - Tony

>  -----Original Message-----
> From: 	Hammond, Tony (ELSLON)  
> Sent:	06 December 2003 06:49
> To:	'uri@w3.org'
> Subject:	Announcement: A revised I-D for "info"
> 
> Hi All:
> 
> Following our announcement of the "info" URI scheme a couple months back
> [1] we would like to notify the list of a revision to the I-D which has
> now been posted on the I-D repository [2]. The revision targets three key
> areas which further simplify the "info" URI scheme as a facilitator for
> referencing information assets:
> 
> 	a) "info" now excludes any dereference capability
> 	   Consequence: no resolution systems are to be associated with
> "info" URIs
> 
> 	b) "info" now includes support for full hierarchy
> 	   Consequence: the identifier component of an "info" URI may
> include "/" chars 
> 
> 	c) "info" now includes support for URI fragments
> 	   Consequence: secondary resources may be indirectly identified by
> "info" URIs
> 
> Additionally, three other changes have also been made:
> 
> 	d) The BNF now reuses many of the RFC2396bis productions
> 	   Consequence: facilitates comparison with future generic URI
> syntax
> 
> 	e) Some of the examples have been changed for simplification
> 	   Consequence: removes possible confusion with other works in
> progres
> 
> 	f) Section 7 "Rationale" has been improved
> 	   Consequence: clearer justification why "info" URI scheme is
> required
> 
> Together with this new I-D we are pleased to announce that an early
> implementation of the "info" URI Registry is now available online at the
> "info" website [3]. The namespace registration records are human/machine
> accessible and can be harvested using the OAI-PMH protocol [4].
> Alternative disclosures of registration records using e.g. RDF/XML may be
> made available at a future time.
> 
> Two additional documents are also made available on the "info" website
> [3]:
> 
> 	1. A comprehensive FAQ which answers common questions re "info"
> 	  (Follow the link <About "info" URI> on the menu bar)
> 
> 	2. An "info" Registry policy document
> 	  (Follow the link <Registry Policy> on the menu bar)
> 
> Please note that both documents are currently evolving and are being made
> available at this time for discussion purposes. They should not be treated
> as authoritative but will be improved through comments received. [Also
> note that the link to the I-D on the "info" website points to the previous
> version ('-00'), not the current version ('-01') - we will amend this.]
> 
> We would like to invite feedback on the Registry and associated documents
> and any comments on the revised I-D.
> 
> One particular question we have regards the use of the BNF productions
> from the draft RFC2396bis [5] rather than from the reference RFC2396 [6]
> itself. The reasons are twofold: i) we would like to futureproof this
> specification, and ii) the "segment" production in RFC2396 is overly
> restrictive, and has now been generalized in the work ongoing in the
> successor to that RFC. We believe this is the correct approach - and seems
> to follow the approach taken in the IRI work [7].
> 
> Thanks,
> Tony 
> 
> Tony Hammond
> Advanced Technology Group, Elsevier
> 32 Jamestone Road, London NW1 7BY, UK
> 
> <tel:+44-20-7424-4445>
> <mailto:t.hammond@elsevier.com>
> 
> 
> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/2003Sep/0100.html
> [2] http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-vandesompel-info-uri-01.txt
> [3] http://info-uri.info/
> [4] http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/openarchivesprotocol.html
> [5]
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-fielding-uri-rfc2396bis-03.txt
> [6] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2396.txt
> [7] http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-duerst-iri-05.txt
> 
>

Received on Saturday, 6 December 2003 01:53:23 UTC