# Re: Yet more URI/URC

Michael Mealling (ccoprmm@oit.gatech.edu)
Tue, 26 Apr 1994 16:03:35 -0400 (EDT)

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Dirk Herr-Hoyman: "Re: Yet more URI/URC"
- Previous message: rdaniel@acl.lanl.gov: "Re: Yet more URI/URC"
- In reply to: Dirk Herr-Hoyman: "Re: Yet more URI/URC"
- Next in thread: Dirk Herr-Hoyman: "Re: Yet more URI/URC"

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

    Message-Id: <199404262003.AA26087@oit.gatech.edu>

    Subject: Re: Yet more URI/URC

    To: hoymand@gate.net (Dirk Herr-Hoyman)

    Date: Tue, 26 Apr 1994 16:03:35 -0400 (EDT)

    In-Reply-To: <m0pvqtG-0004JAC@inca.gate.net> from "Dirk Herr-Hoyman" at Apr 26, 94 01:25:00 pm

(trimmed down the CC field a little on this one...)
Dirk Herr-Hoyman said this:
> At 12:53 PM 4/26/94 -0400, Michael Mealling wrote:
> >I'm planning on my next version of the URC paper proposing a set of
> >elements that we need right now:
Size
Content Type
Cost
Title
Author
Version
Date:
Language:

Anymore?

> >You don't need to negotiate which one you want. That's something that
> >is best left up to the resolution method we end up with. That's
> >why I like whois++. My client can say something like this:
> >
> >template=urn;URN=bla:include=URL
> >Which gives you your location example
> >
> >template=urn;URN=bla:include=URL,size,content-type,cost,title,author,version
> >which gives you your minimal example
> >
> Ok,there's the rub, Michael. You have to know which attributes to ask for.
> That's going to change. What I is suggesting is that we create a
> convention whereby there is a template called minimal (for the sake of
> argument) and the URC service puts in it the elements it wants. Maybe it's
> not hard to do what you are showing us and maybe it can be hidden. But,
> what I don't want to see is a situation where clients have to ask for the
> entire URC, if we have folks creating large URCs.

After looking through the whois++ spec I found that the following will
work as well:

template=urn;URN=bla:format=X-location
Which gives you your location example

template=urn;URN=bla:format=X-minimal
Which gives you your minimal example

template=urn;URN=bla
For full since FULL is the default format for whois++ output

or

template=urn;Title=Mobdy\ Dick:format=X-minimal
For a title search

template=urn;Title=Moby\ Dick;Content-Type=text/postscript:format=X-location
For locations of postscript only versions...

template=urn;Title=Deep Forest;Content-Type=audio/basic;Cost=<US$13.00:format=X-location
for a copy of the Deep Forest CD that costs less that 13.00 US dollars in
audio/basic format.

etc..etc..etc...

Could someone from the wnils group expound on the possibility of having
something like this added to the spec if we got it out in time?

> >> And this needs to be
> >> fast, which is not mentioned in Michael's document either.
> >
> >That document is a list of requirement for a URC. The above requirment
> >is for the resolution protocol which should be addressed in another
> >document. I agree it needs to be as fast or faster than as DNS but
> >that is not something that can or should be made a requirement of
> >something that doesn't have the conept of being fast or slow.
> >
> Well ... ok, but a URC that takes a long time to fetch is of little use to
> me. This is a requirement, and I don't really give a hoot which spec it's
> in. Methinks we've got a bit of reductionism going on here. We need to
> think more wholistically. It's an architecture we are creating, not just a
> bunch of pieces that we are going to hook together at a later date.
>
> I'm perfectly happy to let there be large URCs that can contain any
> imaginable meta-info, but this CANNOT interfer with the basic fundamental
> purpose, which requires the operation to happen quickly. There are other
> directory services for that, IMHO.

I whole heartedly agree. For the most part then your going to leave the
'knob' on your net tools resource location service set to 'fast and loose'
while those that are doing hard resource discovery will have it set to
'long and exact'. Your machine will be asking the whois++ server for
the X-minimal format while the other user will be asking for the
FULL (which is built into whois++ currently) format.

Does that satisfy your requirments of the whole system?

-MM

    --
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Michael Mealling                     ! Hypermedia WWW, WAIS, and gopher will be
    Georgia Institute of Technology      ! here soon via MIME. Your view of the
    Michael.Mealling@oit.gatech.edu      ! internet is about to change completely!

- Next message: Dirk Herr-Hoyman: "Re: Yet more URI/URC"
- Previous message: rdaniel@acl.lanl.gov: "Re: Yet more URI/URC"
- In reply to: Dirk Herr-Hoyman: "Re: Yet more URI/URC"
- Next in thread: Dirk Herr-Hoyman: "Re: Yet more URI/URC"