# [Harald.T.Alvestrand@uninett.no: Re: Whither URI (was: Re: Agent-mediated access )]

Larry Masinter (masinter@parc.xerox.com)
Wed, 5 Jul 1995 17:16:04 PDT

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Larry Masinter: "Re: URN Resolution Paths Considered Harmful"
- Previous message: Roy Fielding: "Re: Whither URI: Revising the charter, disband URI?"

    To: uri@bunyip.com

    Subject: [Harald.T.Alvestrand@uninett.no: Re: Whither URI (was: Re: Agent-mediated access )]

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

    Message-Id: <95Jul5.171608pdt.2762@golden.parc.xerox.com>

    Date: Wed, 5 Jul 1995 17:16:04 PDT

I just noticed that this message wasn't circulated to the mailing
list. It is part of the motivation for my attempts to narrow the
discussion back down to (a) the WG charter and (b) things that are
mentioned in the WG charter goals and milestones.

If you feel that Ron Daniel's proposed charter is too broad or that
the dates are wrong or whatever, please make specific recommendations
for how it should be changed.

================================================================
From: Harald.T.Alvestrand@uninett.no
To: Peter Deutsch <peterd@bunyip.com>
cc: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>, leslie@bunyip.com,
clw@bunyip.com, bajan@bunyip.com, jkrey@isi.edu
Subject: Re: Whither URI (was: Re: Agent-mediated access )
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 1995 06:03:52 -0700

Peter,
not sure how I ended up on the CC list of this one; it is after all
John who is the "case officer" on the URI business, and I haven't seen
previous mail in this exchange.
I've added John to the CC list.

One thing I think I can say rather plainly from the text of your
message, combined with the text of the URI charter:

URAs are *not* inside the scope of the URI working group.

If URAs (or something like them) clearly need to be standardized, it
makes sense to try to type up a charter for them.

Another interesting property of the URI group is that the official
charter,
http://www.ietf.cnri.reston.va.us/html.charters/uri-charter.html, does
not have any goals and milestones that are not marked "done". This
makes it hard to build a very large argumentabout what the group
should or should not be doing based on its charter :-)

If you want to suspend the URN work and do the architecture document
first, that might be a Good Thing, but it will take time. I would
hope that the group could converge on at least a pilot URN scheme in
Stockholm; the present impasse is deeply frustrating to me.

Harald A

- Next message: Larry Masinter: "Re: URN Resolution Paths Considered Harmful"
- Previous message: Roy Fielding: "Re: Whither URI: Revising the charter, disband URI?"