Subject: Re: Idea: URL-based URN space

From: Toby Speight <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 14:11:07 +0100

0> In article <[email-masked]>,
0> Larry Masinter <URL:mailto:[email-masked]> ("Larry") wrote:

Larry> I propose a URN namespace based on URLs, but made persistent by
Larry> the addition of a date.
Larry>
Larry> I would propose calling this namespace 'dated-url' (possibly
Larry> 'durl' or 'url'). These URNs would take the form
Larry>
Larry>      urn:dated-url:<date>:<url>
Larry>
Larry> where <date> was a string representing the date with arbitrary
Larry> precision (following RFC 2550). The largest granularity of a
Larry> date is a year.
Larry>
Larry> One is empowered to assign a dated-url URN with a date of
Larry> <date> and a URL <url> only if one had administrative control
Larry> of the resource located by that URL at that given date/time.

0> In article <[email-masked]>,
0> Martin J. Duerst <URL:mailto:[email-masked]> ("Martin") wrote:

Martin> Shouldn't that say something like 'during that given time'?
Martin> E.g. for the 1999 example below, it would mean during all of
Martin> 1999.

Larry referred to RFC2550, which defines only instants, not periods.
The example refers to the *first moment* of 1999, not the whole year.

---

From: "Martin J. Duerst" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 11:03:58 +0900

>The example refers to the *first moment* of 1999, not the whole year.

Well, yes, but I think that will be misunderstood by many people,
so it may be better to fix it.

Regards,   Martin.