At 5:54 PM -0400 6/4/04, Michael Mealling wrote:
The issue is that the registry is mean to reflect names registered with
the IANA. So the issue is are you suggesting that there is structure
that the IANA must deal with or is your 'structure' opaque to anyone but
you, including the IANA.
I was assuming the structure was opaque to IANA but not
to the MARID use.
This is fine, but the issue is that the IANA is not going to have the
resources to deal with an increasingly complex namespace. If the
proposal is that "marid:m2" is an _opaque_ id and that the IANA can
safely ignore your naming convention, then I'm pretty sure the IANA
would be fine with that. But if you're suggesting that the IANA is going
to create a whole new registration subtree with directories and files to
maintain on their website, then that begins to create a burden that,
IMHO, isn't required.
No, I was thinking of registering them as tokens, not creating a
new registration subtree.
The issue is that marid has chosen to re-use the ":" character for its
substructure. Since these are opaque identifiers anyway, why not just
pick another character so it won't confuse people who think it has
meaning because the earlier parts of the URN do (to a certain extent).
Okay. I think I fall in a slightly different place here, as I think
it would have
the same meaning with MARID contexts as the other parts do, and
that reusing the character for substructure would make sense. That
is opaque to IANA doesn't mean it needs to be opaque to the application.
But it does sound as if this is sufficiently hairy that leaving it
as it is in the draft (marid-1), makes more sense. I apologize
for the distraction to the group.
regards,
Ted