Message-Id: <9310190305.AA07504@mocha.bunyip.com>
To: Steve Putz <putz@parc.xerox.com>
Subject: Re: Summary of Re: URN wrappers and URL:
In-Reply-To: Your message of Mon, 18 Oct 1993 14:32:19 -0700.
<93Oct18.143221pdt.2445@spoggles.parc.xerox.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1993 23:04:57 -0400
From: John Curran <jcurran@nic.near.net>
--------
] From: Steve Putz <putz@parc.xerox.com>
] Subject: Re: Summary of Re: URN wrappers and URL:
] Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1993 14:32:19 PDT
]
] Perhaps the the URL: prefix debate is less important than we are making it.
]
] Do we agree that most of the static URL references that now occur in
] documents should really be URNs? We are now using URLs in documents
] because the necessary light-weight URN creation and lookup mechanisms
] are not defined and implemented yet.
I would really like to see URNs used in documents destined for the
general internet community; particularly in introductory and non-
networking documents.
] I sincerely hope the URN creation and lookup mechanisms we invent will
] be easy enough to use that there will be no desire to use URLs
] explicitly. URLs will fade into the background as part of the
] retrieval mechanism for certain kinds of URNs.
URLs have their place, and there will be many applications that will
have to use URLs rather than URNs. This is similiar to the use of IP
addresses rather than DNS names in certain locations (example: resolver
and nameserver configs, NTP config, routing, etc.)
/John