# Re: A Formalism [Was: URN various ]

Larry Masinter (masinter@parc.xerox.com)
Wed, 25 May 1994 11:06:01 PDT

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Michael Mealling: "Mosaic with beta whois++ extensions ready and available"
- Previous message: Daniel W. Connolly: "A Formalism [Was: URN various ]"

    To: connolly@hal.com

    In-Reply-To: connolly@hal.com's message of Wed, 18 May 1994 18:58:23 -0700 <94May18.185830pdt.2761@golden.parc.xerox.com>

    Subject: Re: A Formalism [Was: URN various ]

    From: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>

    Message-Id: <94May25.110611pdt.2760@golden.parc.xerox.com>

    Date: 	Wed, 25 May 1994 11:06:01 PDT

(It will take me a while to catch up with the mail, please bear with
me).
> The URN requirements specification is foggy because there is
> no definition of the term "resource."

I'm willing to accept the criticism that the URN requirements
specification is foggy, but not because there is no definition of the
term 'resource'. We worked hard *not* to define resources, but merely
to define the requirements for names of them, independently of what
they might be.

I don't think we'll make progress on URN requirements by trying to
define `resource' more formally; I'm willing to try to make it clearer
in the URN requirements document that we're intentionally not defining
'resource' if you think that will help remove some of the fog. Please
advise.

- Next message: Michael Mealling: "Mosaic with beta whois++ extensions ready and available"
- Previous message: Daniel W. Connolly: "A Formalism [Was: URN various ]"