Lists Home |
Date Index |
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gavin Thomas Nicol [mailto:email@example.com]
> On Wednesday 26 February 2003 12:54 pm, Jeff Lowery wrote:
> > My opinion is that the answer lies in a prefix registry
> Why do you need one? If you register foo: as a prefix, so you
> can then do
> foo:bar, why not simply register foo:bar instead?
That would address a different use case: to guarantee the uniqueness (and
associations of) each universal name (I won't call it expanded name, since
there's nothing to expand).
The prefix registry is NO MORE THAN a short-string repository. THE ONLY
SEMANTIC is that ownership is designated as belonging to a registree. WHILE
IT IS POSSIBLE to store association information (such as internet domain,
local names, RDDL documents, etc.), those extensions should not be "core".
> FWIW. I
> can't see the value
> in either... neither guarantees any kind of interpretation.
Precisely, that IS its value: there's very little interpretation to be made
about the information stored. Any interpretations one cares to add are
outside the scope of the registry. This makes the registry simple and
economical to maintain. It need be no more complex than web site registries
that are around today. The one possible exception is that it may be very
desirable to query the registry FOR THE SOLE REASON of establishing whether
a candidate prefix is already registered, and to know who registered it.
[Sorry 'bout the caps, but people seem to be missing the point of the
original proposal. Since I'm unable to articulate it better, I'll just
articulate it louder.]