Internet Info 1997 December/Internet_Info_CD-ROM_Walnut_Creek_December_1997.iso/ietf/urn/urn-archives/urn-ietf.archive.9701/000055_owner-urn-ietf _Fri Jan 31 14:01:54 1997.msg

Internet Message Format | 1997-02-19 | 2KB

Received: (from daemon@localhost) by services.bunyip.com (8.6.10/8.6.9) id OAA07270 for urn-ietf-out; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 14:01:54 -0500
Received: from mocha.bunyip.com (mocha.Bunyip.Com [192.197.208.1]) by services.bunyip.com (8.6.10/8.6.9) with SMTP id OAA07259 for <[e-mail]>; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 14:01:51 -0500
Received: from lysithea.lcs.mit.edu by mocha.bunyip.com with SMTP (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2b/CC-Guru-2b)
        id AA28867  (mail destined for [e-mail]); Fri, 31 Jan 97 14:01:49 -0500
Received: (from sollins@localhost) by lysithea.lcs.mit.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) id OAA11060; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 14:01:42 -0500
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 14:01:42 -0500
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
From: "Karen R. Sollins" <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail], [e-mail]
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
    ([e-mail])
Subject: Re: [URN] Reltive URNs
Sender: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Karen R. Sollins" <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]

Yes, URNs are intended not only to be persistent, but also to be
global.  Furthermore, the closest we got in the URN requirements to
humans was to say that they be "human transcribable".  We
intentionally did not go further into the realm of human friendliness.
Relative and global are contradictory in my model of this world,
unless someone can _guarantee_ that a relative URN would NEVER escape
the environment within which it is relative without being converted to
its global representation.  But, if that's the case, it doesn't belong
in a standard anyway; it's a private convention, and people can do
anything they want in private, as long as it doesn't affect the
outside world.

So, this whole discussion about "relative" URNs leaves me very puzzled.

            Karen