RE: URNs, Namespaces and Registries

> Hi All,
> 
> I'm new to your mailinglist, so I hope I don't inadvertantly do
> something you consider bad form. Just let me know if I get out of line
> and I'll try to reform.
> 
> I recently joined the OASIS XRI Technical Committee, so I'm very
> interested in the URNs, Namespaces and Registries [1] document. I've
> read it, and after I cogitate it a little more, I hope to be able to
> discuss various aspects on this mailing list.
> 
> In the meantime I'd like to understand a little more about the TAG's
> views on URN, and existing URN sub-schemes. It's not explicitly
> stated, but from my reading I get the sense that the TAG would
> consider URN to be in the same category as the other "myRI" schemes,
> except that it's already widely used, and it's difficult to turn off
> support for established/legacy capabilities. If URN were a new effort,
> what would the TAG think about it? What does the TAG think about
> existing URN sub-schemes? 
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/URNsAndRegistries-50.xml 
> 
> 
> Marty Schleiff
>

Received on Friday, 4 August 2006 17:42:52 UTC