Message-Id: <9306071346.AA25491@mocha.bunyip.com>
To: timbl@nxoc01.cern.ch
Subject: Re: Suggest meaning for URN
In-Reply-To: Your message of Mon, 07 Jun 1993 14:47:51 +0100.
<9306071347.AA05514@www3.cern.ch>
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 1993 09:44:41 -0400
From: John Curran <jcurran@nic.near.net>
--------
] From: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@www3.cern.ch>
] Subject: Re: Suggest meaning for URN
] Date: Mon, 7 Jun 93 14:47:51 +0100
]
] Ed: > Are they not just a string which is a permanent symbolic
] reference
]
] > to a resource. Period.
]
] Peter: >Yeah!! <clapclapclap>
]
] Ed, you say "symbolic reference". A "reference" can normally be
] dereferenced. If it can't, then fair enough but say that it
] supports equality but that's it.
]
] If it can, then you have to have an algorithm in mind, which will
] almost certainly involved the user knowing a little about the inside
] of a URN, to know the first step to dereferencing it.
Tim,
You're right, of course. We are at the point in URN definition
where it's time to look at how they will be used, and make sure that
we've included any necessary requirements (such as internal structure).
Is it sufficient to say that:
o We'd like to have a URN resolution protocol
o Said protocol should encompass hierarchy and delegation (ala DNS)
o The top of the URN namespace would consist of a controllable
number of scheme identifiers.
o Queries for URN resolution sent to the "top" URN servers would
be referred to the appropriate servers for the URN scheme.
The "scheme" URN servers would in turn refer to the server
for the specific naming authority.
I'm uncertain as to whether or not this requires a uniform delimiter
between fields (such as DNS's '.'), or whether the delimiter could be
context-controlled. Perhaps we should ask Peter D. what he plans for
"URN:md5-bunyip.com:"?
/John