# Re: options, not nesting?

Martin Hamilton (M.T.Hamilton@lut.ac.uk)
Thu, 28 Oct 1993 18:02:00 +0000 (GMT)

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Mitra: "Re: options, not nesting?"
- Previous message: Peter Deutsch: "Single protocol for UR*?"
- In reply to: Michael Mealling: "Re: options, not nesting?"
- Next in thread: Michael Mealling: "Re: options, not nesting?"
- Reply: Michael Mealling: "Re: options, not nesting?"

    From: Martin Hamilton <M.T.Hamilton@lut.ac.uk>

    Message-Id: <199310281802.SAA12962@lust.lut.ac.uk>

    Subject: Re: options, not nesting?

    To: ccoprmm@oit.gatech.edu (Michael Mealling)

    Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1993 18:02:00 +0000 (GMT)

    In-Reply-To: <199310281747.AA24672@oit.oit.gatech.edu> from "Michael Mealling" at Oct 28, 93 01:47:46 pm

Michael said:

/ I would make some slight changes because what you are saying is that ALL
/ of those URLs are of type text. What do I do if I have a URN that is in
/ multiple formats? Add something like precedence and I think we might
/ have something. What I mean by precedence is that if a non-URI template
/ item appears after a URI: URN then that info is global. If it appears
/ after a URI: URL then it is only local to that specific example. Hmm...
/ do a %s/precedence/scope/ in the last paragraph. Basically you would
/ have:

Ok, I wasn't suggesting that the URLs all had to be of one type -
the template I based the example on actually has provision for
multiple instances of the object, so you could say that all the
URIs belonged to the first instance, and we end up with something
more like this...

/ URI: URN:ASCII:IANA:internet-drafts:draft-ietf-iiir-wais
/ Template-Type: document
/ Category: Informational RFC
/ Title: WAIS over Z39.50-1988
/ Author-Name: M. St. Pierre, J. Fullton, K. Gamiel, J. Goldman, B. Kahle,
/ J. A. Kunze, H. Morris, F. Schiettecatte
/ Version: 00
/ Pages: 5
/ Description:
/ The purpose of this memo is to initiate a discussion for a migration
/ path of the WAIS technology from Z39.50-1988 (Information Retrieval
/ Service Definitions and Protocol Specification for Library Applications)
/ to Z39.50-1992 and then to Z39.50-1994. The purpose of this memo is
/ not to provide a detailed implementation specification, but rather to
/ describe the high-level design goals and functional assumptions made
/ in the WAIS implementation of Z39.50-1988. WAIS use of Z39.50-1992
/ and Z39.50-1994 standards will be the subject of future RFCs.
/ Publication-Status: Internet Draft (IIIR Working Group)
/ Publisher-Organization-Name: IETF
/ Creation-Date: November 1993
/ Keywords: WAIS protocol Z39.50
/ URI: URL:ftp://ds.internic.net/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-iiir-wais-00.txt
/ Format: text
/ Size: 13475
/ Language: En.US
/ Character-Set: 8859/1
/ URI: URL:ftp://munnari.oz.au/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-iiir-wais-00.txt
/ Format: Postscript
/ Size: 1313475
/ Language: En.UK
/ Character-Set: 8859/1
/ URI: URL:ftp://nic.nordu.net/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-iiir-wais-00.txt
/
/ Is this change unpalatable?

It's exactly what I had in mind! At last - UR Consensus!! :-)

Martin

- Next message: Mitra: "Re: options, not nesting?"
- Previous message: Peter Deutsch: "Single protocol for UR*?"
- In reply to: Michael Mealling: "Re: options, not nesting?"
- Next in thread: Michael Mealling: "Re: options, not nesting?"
- Reply: Michael Mealling: "Re: options, not nesting?"