- From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) <clbullar@ingr.com>
- Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 08:05:55 -0500
- To: "'Paul Denning'" <pauld@mitre.org>, www-tag@w3.org
- Cc: "Pulvermacher,Mary K." <PULVER@mitre.org>, "Scarano,James G." <jgs@mitre.org>
A URN is machine processable. It is a string just as a URL. It is not web system processable unless mapped. Software for such exists and where it is does not, is not difficult to create. The point of the URN that should be emphasized is maintenance. While the emphasis may seem subtle or obvious, it is nonetheless the point of URN application just as it is for any formal public identifier. This is not an architectural issue; it is a policy issue and as such, is not in need of TAG guidance. It is a technical side effect that has to be understood by any organization, governmental or private, that must control name assignments. len bullard From: Paul Denning [mailto:pauld@mitre.org] The DoD has the DoD XML Registry [2], which has recently placed access restrictions so documents may not be generally available anymore. They have a concept of "namespaces", which refers to communities of interest. For example, Aerospace Operations (AOP) is one namespace, which had published some guidelines [3]. At one point they were considering using URNs, then were considering registering a new URI scheme "xmlns". Based on [4], they are reconsidering this approach. They are monitoring the W3C TAG for guidance.
Received on Thursday, 24 April 2003 09:18:02 UTC