Date: Thu, 20 Oct 1994 14:58:40 PDT
From: Steve_Strasen.ES_AE@xerox.com
Subject: "Why isn't IETF using FPIs?"
To: uri@bunyip.com
Message-Id: <"20-Oct-94 14:58:26".*.Steve_Strasen.ES_AE@Xerox.com>
The following message was sent by Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com> Tue, 18 Oct 1994 19:09:59 PDT. At the suggestion of Mitra, I am redistributing the discussion to date to uri@bunyip.com.
Steve Strasen
strasen.esae@xerox.com
----- Begin Forwarded Messages -----
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 94 19:16:01 PDT
From: masinter@parc.xerox.COM
Subject: "why isn't IETF using FPIs?"
To: mitra@path.NET
cc: steve_strasen.es_ae@Xerox.com
Message-ID: <94Oct18.191614pdt.2760@golden.parc.xerox.com>
<----RFC822 headers-----
Received: from golden.parc.xerox.com ([13.1.100.139]) by alpha.xerox.com with SMTP id <14433(4)>; Tue, 18 Oct 1994 19:09:59 PDT
Received: by golden.parc.xerox.com id <2760>; Tue, 18 Oct 1994 19:16:14 -0700
From: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
Sender: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
Fake-Sender: masinter@parc.xerox.com
-----RFC822 headers---->
I'm showing my ignorance, but at a meeting today I was pressed rather
hard about why the Internet community is ignoring the work in ISO
standards in identifying Formal Public Identifiers or some such such
as are deployed in 'bento'; it's an existing naming structure, allows
the generation of new IDs by obtaining an ISBN number, etc.
I didn't have a good answer; what I vaguely recall about the FPIs is
that they have a lot of the structure that we actually wanted for
URNs.
I don't actually have the right document name, I bet. Steve, can you
help me dig up the right reference?
----- End Forwarded Messages -----