RE: [xri] Explicitly non-resolvable XRIs

["Dave McAlpin" <dave.mcalpin@epokinc.com>]

I don't think version (or any $ tag) would work for non-resolvability
because it applies to segments rather than the XRI as a whole. It's also not
available in the URI-authority portion which is a place it seems like we'd
need it. I suppose you could do something like

xri:(xri://foo.com).($n)

to show that

xri://foo.com

is unresolvable, but that doesn't seem ideal to me. I may also just be
misunderstanding your proposal.

Dave

-----Original Message-----
From: Marc LeMaitre [mailto:marc.lemaitre@onename.com] 
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 7:54 PM
To: Dave McAlpin; xri@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [xri] Explicitly non-resolvable XRIs

Could you put meta data in the version syntax that indicated that the
XRI points to an unresolvable resource? That way an identifier could
point to a non-resolvable resource in one version and a resolvable
resource the next without having to change the main body of the XRI.
 
Marc
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Dave McAlpin [mailto:dave.mcalpin@epokinc.com] 
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 7:36 PM
To: xri@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [xri] Explicitly non-resolvable XRIs
 
There's a desire to provide syntax that marks an XRI as explicitly
unresolvable. Draft-06 includes a bang "!" character in the
authority-part production for this purpose. As noted in the issues list,
this causes several problems with XRIs that contain a URI-authority. For
example, software that knows how to handle generic URIs will see the !
as part of the server component (most likely the hostname component),
where it's an illegal character. I'm suggesting we define a different
scheme, xrin, that's identical to xri except that it explicitly
disallows resolution. Thoughts or comments?
 
Dave