# Re: Re Revised URN

Mitra (mitra@pandora.sf.ca.us)
Mon, 16 May 1994 22:14:19 GMT

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Mitra: "Re: URN Requirements"
- Previous message: Andrew Pam: "Re: Re Revised URN"
- Maybe in reply to: Terry Allen: "Re Revised URN"
- Next in thread: Daniel W. Connolly: "Re: Re Revised URN"
- Reply: Daniel W. Connolly: "Re: Re Revised URN"

    From: mitra@pandora.sf.ca.us (Mitra)

    Subject: Re: Re Revised URN

    Date: Mon, 16 May 1994 22:14:19 GMT

    Message-Id: <Cpx1rw.JCw@pandora.sf.ca.us>

Terry,

Do you mean that hte requirement should be dropped, or that it should be
kept with a caveat that it might not be correct.

In particular, I would like it asserted that the correct situation is
that a resource has one, and only one, URN, but that applications should
acknowledge that in the real word, incorrect situations can occur.

- Mitra

- Next message: Mitra: "Re: URN Requirements"
- Previous message: Andrew Pam: "Re: Re Revised URN"
- Maybe in reply to: Terry Allen: "Re Revised URN"
- Next in thread: Daniel W. Connolly: "Re: Re Revised URN"
- Reply: Daniel W. Connolly: "Re: Re Revised URN"