[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: Versioning
James Clark scripsit: > > urn:publicid:-:OASIS:NOTATION:TREX:1.0 I meant to write: urn:publicid:-:OASIS:NOTATION:TREX:EN:1.0 where EN=English, the language of the TREX specification. [snip] > I think using a URN is good, and I think having the last component of > the URN be the version number is good, but I don't see the benefit of > using an FPI-based URI: it looks over-complex to me. Except for the "NOTATION", which could just as well be "NAMESPACE" (the currently proposed publicid URN syntax extends the dozen-plus FPI document classes to be any arbitrary identifier), I think this says everything that needs to be said: the document owner is OASIS (a non-registered name), the name of the thing being labeled is TREX. > What URN schemes are there available? There are currently *no* general-purpose URN namespaces available. Currently we have the "ietf" namespace, for RFCs and their close relatives; the "pin" namespace, for Whois objects; and the "issn" namespace, for serials (newspapers, magazines, etc.). None of these is suitable. -- John Cowan cowan@ccil.org One art/there is/no less/no more/All things/to do/with sparks/galore --Douglas Hofstadter
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC