RE: [xri] GCS Characters

["Drummond Reed" <drummond.reed@cordance.net>]

> Drummond Reed wrote:
> > Actually, Marty, the semantics of = and @ is exactly what you
> > describe for $
> > and + and * and !. They do not describe the resource. They describe
> > the
> > identifier for the resource. = says the identifier is assigned by a
> > personal
> > authority - an individual data subject in privacy terms. @ says the
> > identifier is assigned by an organizational authority - an entity
> > that is
> > _not_ an individual data authority in privacy terms.
> 
> Victor wrote:
> = does not say the identifier is assigned BY a personal authority, it
> says the identifier is assigned TO a personal authority (probably by
> some organization).

Actually, the spec says just the opposite. From XRI Syntax 2.0, Table 1 in
Section 2.2.1.2:

*************************
= (Person) Identifiers for whom the authority is controlled by an individual
person.

@ (Organization) Identifiers for whom the authority is controlled by an
organization or a resource in an organizational context.

+ (General public) Identifiers for whom there is no specific controlling
authority because they represent generic dictionary concepts or "tags" whose
meaning is determined by consensus. (In the English language, for example,
these would be the generic nouns.)

$ (Standards body) Identifiers for whom the authority is controlled by a
specification from a standards body, for example, other XRI specifications
from the OASIS XRI Technical Committee, other OASIS specifications, or
(using cross-references) other standards bodies.
*************************

There's a good reason for this -- the very reason Marty explains, i.e., that
GCS characters do not describe the identified resource, only the identifier
for the resource (which a limitation of any pure identifier syntax). Thus we
were very careful to make the distinctions defined above, i.e, that the
controller of an = identifier is a person, not that it identifies a person.
For example, I could register an =name for my cat. And an organization can
register an @name for any asset, such as a ship, a meeting room, a division,
a product line, etc.

> I agree with Marty that metadata about what privacy rules or any
> other regulations might apply to the entity being identified would be
> better put in the metadata container, i.e. the XRD. Overloading the
> GCS character with metadata about what privacy rules apply to the
> entity being identified doesn't make sense. Otherwise we might find
> that we needed to create another GCS character for children under 13
> years of age, for example.

The distinction between personal and organizational authority because is so
deep -- and involves identifier trademark and property issues that are so
universal -- that it is reflected in directories of many kinds, including
telephone books (white pages, grey pages, yellow pages).

=Drummond