# Re: URN single or multiple variants

Tim Berners-Lee (timbl@www3.cern.ch)
Mon, 20 Sep 93 17:29:15 +0200

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Harald T. Alvestrand: "Re: URN Usage"
- Previous message: Terry Winograd: "Re: URN single or multiple variants"
- Maybe in reply to: Mitra: "URN single or multiple variants"

    Date: Mon, 20 Sep 93 17:29:15 +0200

    From: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@www3.cern.ch>

    Message-Id: <9309201529.AA04613@www3.cern.ch>

    To: mitra@path.net (Mitra)

    Subject: Re: URN single or multiple variants

I agree in general with Mitra (that the same URN should
refer to any variants, machine conversion, etc) when it
comes to actual usage today with _documents_.

I feel that in the future, we will be dealing with other objects
of great diversity -- but in a seamless continuum with the document
world. Therefore we should not restrict ourselves to _insist_ on
document-related functions.

I feel that we should leave it open, that URNs *may* be issued for
works which contain many versions, OR for each version, at the whim
of the issuer. The properties of a given URN should be
a valid question between client and server, and between the
URN issuer and issuee. That is, you give (sell?) me a URN, then
I want to know what it is good for. It may be part of the
contract.

Tim

Begin forwarded message:

Newsgroups: list.ietf.uri
Path: mitra
From: mitra@path.net (Mitra)
Subject: URN single or multiple variants
Organization: Pandora Systems
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1993 18:04:47 GMT
Apparently-To: uri@bunyip.com

I think we reached consensus on this issue at the last IETF, but I
would
like to check in with everyone, to see if I'm correct on this.

The debate is over the situation of a document which is available in

multiple variants (e.g. Postscript, text, Giff etc). The question

was whether:

a) we assign a single URN to this (and pass it around with

attribute information to distinguish the variant to choose) or

b) assign a URN to each of the variants, with the attribute
information
telling us about the document we have.

I believe we consensed on (a) because it allows us to present users
with
a choice of variants. If this is not the case, then we need a
decision soon
because it fundamentally affects the design of information systems
using
URN's.

Chris - If there isnt consensus on this, then can you put it on the
agenda
for Houston.

- Mitra

- Next message: Harald T. Alvestrand: "Re: URN Usage"
- Previous message: Terry Winograd: "Re: URN single or multiple variants"
- Maybe in reply to: Mitra: "URN single or multiple variants"