# Re: Globalizing URIs

Jim Conklin (conklin@info.cren.net)
Tue, 15 Aug 1995 15:20:58 +0100

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Brian Behlendorf: "Re: Globalizing URIs"
- Previous message: Karen R. Sollins: "Re: Globalizing URIs"
- Next in thread: Martin J Duerst: "Re: Globalizing URIs"
- Reply: Martin J Duerst: "Re: Globalizing URIs"

    Message-Id: <199508151918.PAA12340@info.cren.net>

    Date: Tue, 15 Aug 1995 15:20:58 +0100

    To: Martijn Koster <mak@victor.nexor.co.uk>, Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu>

    From: conklin@info.cren.net (Jim Conklin)

    Subject: Re: Globalizing URIs

At 10:11 AM 8/15/95 +0100, Martijn Koster wrote:
>In message <199508142110.RAA19670@wilma.cs.utk.edu>, Keith Moore writes:
> ...
>> 6) URLs expressed in character sets besides ASCII are more vulnerable
>> ...

I'd like to make a clarification about my own comments, and request one:

I believe that Martin's first (and probably later) messages(s) referred
to URL's, and I responded without noticing, since they were on the uri or
urc list.
I personally believe that this is really NOT an issue we should pursue
for URL's, for which I believe wewe've made our decisions and moved beyond
that.
I do, however, believe that this is an issue which MUST be pursued at
whatever UR* level at which humans interact directly with the information,
either supplying it or reading (etc) it, despite the very real difficulties
which that presents. My personal suspicion is that URNs are perhaps the
right entities for which this issue is relevant.
Is there general agreement that we're not trying to redefine URLs?
If so, is there any agreement as to which UR* this discussion should
apply and (perhaps) where it should therefore take place?

Jim

- Next message: Brian Behlendorf: "Re: Globalizing URIs"
- Previous message: Karen R. Sollins: "Re: Globalizing URIs"
- Next in thread: Martin J Duerst: "Re: Globalizing URIs"
- Reply: Martin J Duerst: "Re: Globalizing URIs"