# Re: URN single or multiple variants

Chris Weider (clw@merit.edu)
Thu, 16 Sep 93 11:31:53 -0400

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Marc Andreessen: "Re: URN single or multiple variants"
- Previous message: Chris Weider: "Re: Versioning?"
- Maybe in reply to: Mitra: "URN single or multiple variants"
- Next in thread: Tim Berners-Lee: "Re: URN single or multiple variants"

    Date: Thu, 16 Sep 93 11:31:53 -0400

    From: "Chris Weider" <clw@merit.edu>

    Message-Id: <9309161531.AA01192@merit.edu>

    To: mitra@path.net, uri@bunyip.com

    Subject: Re:  URN single or multiple variants

Mitra:
The consensus was essentially version a), that documents in multiple formats
get a single URN, then there is additional information retrievable from the
information service to negotiate format. However, there is the caveat that
the naming authority can assign URNs however it chooses. This avoids the
very sticky problem of getting a coherent definition for 'intellectual content'.
However, we strongly stress that URNs should be assigned in an encoding-
independent manner.
Chris

> From uri-request@mocha.bunyip.com Wed Sep 15 15:48:43 1993
> Received: from mocha.bunyip.com by merit.edu (5.65/1123-1.0)
> > id AA22534; Wed, 15 Sep 93 15:48:37 -0400
> Received: by mocha.bunyip.com (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2b/CC-Guru-2b)
> id AA03309 on Wed, 15 Sep 93 14:08:22 -0400
> Received: from pandora.sf.ca.us by mocha.bunyip.com with SMTP (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2b/CC-Guru-2b)
> id AA03305 (mail destined for /usr/lib/sendmail -odq -oi -furi-request uri-out) on Wed, 15 Sep 93 14:08:16 -0400
> Received: from fire.path.net by pandora.sf.ca.us id aa26909; 15 Sep 93 11:08 PDT
> Received: by fire.path.net (4.1/SMI-4.1)
> > id AA00868; Wed, 15 Sep 93 11:04:52 PDT
> Newsgroups: list.ietf.uri
> Path: mitra
> From: mitra@path.net (Mitra)
> Subject: URN single or multiple variants
> Message-Id: <CDEq80.nn@pandora.sf.ca.us>
> Organization: Pandora Systems
> X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
> Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1993 18:04:47 GMT
> Apparently-To: uri@bunyip.com
> Status: RO

> 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: Marc Andreessen: "Re: URN single or multiple variants"
- Previous message: Chris Weider: "Re: Versioning?"
- Maybe in reply to: Mitra: "URN single or multiple variants"
- Next in thread: Tim Berners-Lee: "Re: URN single or multiple variants"