# finalize URLs, wait on UR*

Kevin Altis (kevin@scic.intel.com)
Tue, 19 Oct 1993 11:36:57 -0800

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: John A. Kunze: "Re: URNs and Meta-Information - The Value of ISBN"
- Previous message: Erik Huizer: "IETF work and UR*"
- Next in thread: Marc Andreessen: "finalize URLs, wait on UR*"
- Reply: Marc Andreessen: "finalize URLs, wait on UR*"

    Message-Id: <9310191840.AA16184@rs042.scic.intel.com>

    Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1993 11:36:57 -0800

    To: uri@bunyip.com

    From: kevin@scic.intel.com (Kevin Altis)

    Subject: finalize URLs, wait on UR*

I joined into the discussion a little late and I won't be in Houston, so I
won't get to make any points there (or vote), so...

The URL arguments are minor and can easily be finalized at Houston; on the
Web, URLs have gotten a lot of use and no major gotchas have popped up.
Most of the controversy is about URNs and UR* to come. If a decision isn't
made on URN or UR* at Houston what do we lose? Obviously, standard
distributed info. servers can't be deployed, but it doesn't look like we're
ready for that anyway. I would rather see a decison delayed and make sure
we get it right, than to rush headlong into a URN design that isn't going
to work. What are the compelling reasons to do URNs now?!

Oh, I'll be away from email for the rest of this week (Seybold conference),
so I won't see your flames until next week. :)

ka

- Next message: John A. Kunze: "Re: URNs and Meta-Information - The Value of ISBN"
- Previous message: Erik Huizer: "IETF work and UR*"
- Next in thread: Marc Andreessen: "finalize URLs, wait on UR*"
- Reply: Marc Andreessen: "finalize URLs, wait on UR*"