# Re: Requests for time

Larry Masinter (masinter@parc.xerox.com)
Thu, 21 Oct 1993 16:07:59 PDT

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Michael Mealling: "Re: New URM paper with additions!"
- Previous message: John A. Kunze: "URN definition -- a way out?"

    To: uri@bunyip.com

    In-Reply-To: bajan@bunyip.com's message of Thu, 21 Oct 1993 14:05:37 -0700 <93Oct21.140549pdt.2795@golden.parc.xerox.com>

    Subject: Re: Requests for time

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

    Message-Id: <93Oct21.160814pdt.2795@golden.parc.xerox.com>

    Date: 	Thu, 21 Oct 1993 16:07:59 PDT

I'd like to speak at Houston. I have the following topics:

* including type information with URLs that are currently not
self-typing (gopher/http urls are self-typing--you can determine the
data type either from the URL itself or by interacting with the
service--FTP urls are not.)

* possibly abandoning the requirement that the same URN apply to
different representations of the `same' intellectual content.

* use of one-way hash values in (or as a kind of) URN to insure
integrity without having a centralized authority.

I'd suggest, when people write their opinions, they separate out
* the problem (what's broken)
* the proposals (what do you propose doing about it)
if there is more than one choice, list them separately
* current practice (what do current servers/browsers do)
* pros and cons of each proposal (i.e., separate the arguments
from the proposal.)

I'll try to do this for these three issues. If anyone wants to discuss
these subtopics privately, send me email, and I'll review the writeups
with you first.

- Next message: Michael Mealling: "Re: New URM paper with additions!"
- Previous message: John A. Kunze: "URN definition -- a way out?"