Subject: [urn] 2141bis questions - (4) Section 5 on URI Conformance

From: John C Klensin <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2014 12:44:39 -0500

We've had some on-list discussion about the wording of parts of
Section 5 of 2141bis.  I think we've reached general agreement
about some of the language in the first paragraph or two and
Peter or I will post draft text sometime soon to see if it is
actually what the WG intends.   

However, a careful reading of the rest of that section turns up
several related issues.   Before trying to write and circulate
draft text, I want to verify that it is the view of the URN WG
that precise rules (and constraints and restrictions) for the
use of URNs embedded in various contexts is the job of the
definitions for those contexts, not 2141bis or other generic URN
documents.

On particular, while 2141bis can (and probably should) offer
general guidance for issues a context/usage designer should
think about, decisions about what can, or cannot, appear with
href in <a> elements are a matter for HTML, not this
specification.

Is the WG in enough agreement about that to allow us to draft
text?

    john

---

From: Peter Saint-Andre - &yet <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2014 11:49:33 -0700

> definitions for those contexts, not 2141bis or other generic URN

I would think so.

> href in <a> elements are a matter for HTML, not this

Very much +1.

> Is the WG in enough agreement about that to allow us to draft

Yes, please.

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://andyet.com/