# Re: URN Resolution Paths Considered Harmful

Fisher Mark (FisherM@is3.indy.tce.com)
Tue, 27 Jun 95 07:23:00 PDT

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Kee Hinckley: "RE: Intelligent Rating Systems"
- Previous message: Fisher Mark: "Re: date in URN"
- Maybe in reply to: Fisher Mark: "URN Resolution Paths Considered Harmful"
- Next in thread: Karen R. Sollins: "Re: URN Resolution Paths Considered Harmful"
- Reply: Karen R. Sollins: "Re: URN Resolution Paths Considered Harmful"

    From: Fisher Mark <FisherM@is3.indy.tce.com>

    To: "'URI'" <uri@bunyip.com>

    Subject: Re: URN Resolution Paths Considered Harmful

    Date: Tue, 27 Jun 95 07:23:00 PDT

    Message-Id: <2FF0182B@MSMAIL.INDY.TCE.COM>

I think that any URN naming scheme that embeds the name of a resolving agent
for that object's name is a bad idea (IMHO). Name resolving servers will
change over time, whereas the intent is for URN names to be unchanging and
unique for all time. Unchanging names with embedded resolvers doesn't fit
well with the fact of changing resolvers...

Three examples from other areas of practice:

1) DNS. A DNS name (as I have mentioned) does not embed the name of its
resolver. This very property has made DNS successful, as changes in the
resolution path can be made with a minimum of pain. Admittedly, maintenance
of the .com domain is messy now, but that is the price of progress.

2) Relational databases. Having worked for and on CODASYL network databases
and written relational database applications, I can see why relational
databases have supplanted CODASYL network databases for most significant
applications -- flexibility. If you have hard-wired paths to the data,
there will always be cases where the path you need does not exist.

3) Domain-based email addresses. Even for the case of people who receive
their mail via UUCP, the common practice seems now to be to piggyback on top
of DNS, such that UUCP path resolution occurs close (in terms of UUCP hops)
to the UUCP receiving site; the rest of the world does not know or care that
the physical email address requires an explicit path, as that is hidden from
the world. (As an example, an email address of "jones@isp.com" which could
be expanded to "isp.com!uucp.cs.purdue.edu!jones!root".) How often, lately,
have you seen path-based email addresses in journal articles, etc.? I
strongly suspect not very often, whereas it was quite common just a few
years ago.

Computers are very good at keeping track of data and the relationships
between data. Let's use computers for what they are good at.
======================================================================
Mark Fisher Thomson Consumer Electronics
fisherm@indy.tce.com Indianapolis, IN

- Next message: Kee Hinckley: "RE: Intelligent Rating Systems"
- Previous message: Fisher Mark: "Re: date in URN"
- Maybe in reply to: Fisher Mark: "URN Resolution Paths Considered Harmful"
- Next in thread: Karen R. Sollins: "Re: URN Resolution Paths Considered Harmful"
- Reply: Karen R. Sollins: "Re: URN Resolution Paths Considered Harmful"