# Re: URN definition -- a way out?

Fred Swartz (fred.swartz@umich.edu)
Mon, 25 Oct 1993 12:50:36 -0400

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Fred Swartz: "Re: Permanence of URNs"
- Previous message: John Curran: "Re: what good is a URL without type information?"

    Message-Id: <9310251650.AA13331@merit.edu>

    To: mitra@path.net (Mitra)

    From: "Fred Swartz" <fred.swartz@umich.edu>

    Subject: Re: URN definition -- a way out?

    In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 24 Oct 1993 11:01:24 PDT."

                 <9310241101.aa25924@pandora.sf.ca.us>

    Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1993 12:50:36 -0400

> From: mitra@path.net (Mitra)
>There is no protocol definition fro URN->URC resolution,
>I think that is the key thingto decide on next.

I'd love to see some real protocol proposals to clarify
the numerous murky issues. Do you see this as a different
protocol than that which defines URN->URL mapping? Isn't
the URL just one of the fields of the URN record?

It seems to me there is only one protocol here.

-- Fred (fred.swartz@merit.edu)

- Next message: Fred Swartz: "Re: Permanence of URNs"
- Previous message: John Curran: "Re: what good is a URL without type information?"