Hi Paul, I am not an author, but let me disagree with one of your reported issues:
> On 14 Sep 2017, at 16:45, Paul Kyzivat <[email protected]> wrote: > > (2) MAJOR: Name or query? > > A URN is by definition a *name*. Some parts of this document do focus on the > lex URN as a name. But the document also proposes using the lex URN as a > *query*. The following text from section 2 highlights this: > > "To cope with possible incomplete or inaccurate uniform names, > the implementation of a catalogue, based on a relational- > database, able to associate a URN to related URLs, is > suggested, as it will lead to a higher flexibility in the > resolution process. A resolver can provide names normalization, > completion of inaccurate or incomplete names, and finally their > resolution in network locations (see Section 8.2 and 8.3 for > characteristics and behaviour of a catalogue for resolution)." > > This behavior is inconsistent with the intent of URNs. I think the document is only talking about names. Association with URLs is the result of URN resolution process, which is a part of URN architecture. If this is not clear, I think it should be clarified (if authors agree that this is the intent). Best Regards, Alexey _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
