[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [xri] versioning of authirity section [Issue 5]
Wachob, Gabe wrote: >More specifically, I have several open questions and points w/r/t versioning naming authorities: > >1) What implication does this have for equivalence rules? (not specific to versions-in-the-naming-authority) That is, are two URIs with different version tags (or one with a version tag and one without) *ever* equivalent? URI schemes should specify equivalence rules - generally the default is "syntactic character-by-character equivalence" (usually with some ignorance of case for domain names) > I would think the could be. Eg: xri://owl.peterd.us/pets/dogs/dante is equivalent (today) to xri://owl.peterd.us/pets/dogs/eldest[:20030423] in this case, version is expressing a state of things at a point in time. When dante passes on to doggie heaven <emotion type="sniff"/> xri://owl.peterd.us/pets/dogs/eldest[:20030423] will still be accurate, however, xri://owl.peterd.us/pets/dogs/eldest would then be equivelant to xri://owl.peterd.us/pets/dogs/virgil this (in part) is why i believe the TAG views versioning as such a sticky wicket. >2) What implication for the resolutoin process (RDDDS for URIs). I see two cases: > >a) Version parts are interpreted "opaquely" -- that any version string (including the ':', ',', etc leading characters) are essentially unparsed by a resolver. In this case, i think DDDS-style resolution isn't really affected. > >b) Version parts need to be "canonicalized" or otherwise parsed to make sure they are resolved correctly (from a semantic point of view). > >It seems to me that #2 is the more likely situation since how does a resolver understand that a version of the naming authority 'as of January 20th' is the same one as that which is in place today? DDDS (and RDDDS) do resolution based on pattern matching - it seems to me that versions in the naming authority parts would totally eliminate DDDS as a viable resolution mechanism. I don't think versioning breaks the HTTP resolution, but it may break some caching semantics (because things which are not syntactically equal may in fact be semantically equal - need to think this through). > > Excellent point, and why i think an entire document for resolution with versioning could be warranted (but undesirable!). DDDS will not assist here when there is a change of authority, unless the gaining authority is compeled to retain regex NAPTRs which may assist in the redirection of the authority part. >3) I tend to think the distinction between XRI URIs (versioned namespace authorities) and XRI URNs (not versioned, since I think this breaks the semantics of "once and forever assigned..") makes sense. > >Maybe the answer to #2 is that versioning is important in XRI URIs and that DDDS simply isn't an option there? > Hmmm.. not entirely convinced of this yet. I'll have to think more abt versions and DDDS. ---- peterd
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]