Subject: Re: [urn] Re-examining p-components (and "/", hierarchy, and relative references)

From: John C Klensin <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 09:00:42 -0400

--On Friday, April 17, 2015 06:10 +0000 "Hakala, Juha E"
<[email-masked]> wrote:

>...
> Library community has well established practices for how to
> use identifiers. URNBIS could use these practices as the
> starting point, extend them if needed and alter them only when
> there is a good reason to do so. As a result URNBIS should
> have a more unified understanding of what kind of
> functionality needs to be supported now, and what can be
> postponed for the time being.
>...

Juha,

While I found your note very helpful, I need to identify a
difficulty with the above suggestion.  While I think we may be
able to defer working out the details of semantics for
additional cases, I believe we will get only one shot at syntax
that is reserved in 2141.  In particular, if either reserved
query keywords or Keith's idea about special syntax (such as
"??") embedded in q-components are needed, or if p-components or
f-components [1]need to be handled in some special way by a
parser that is specifically aware of the URN scheme but not
particular namespaces, I don't see any way to postpone decisions
about that syntax.

There is also at least a potential issue with other communities
and their needs and practices.

So I think we need to be a little bit careful about what we can
postpone or assume that we can postpone.

best,
   john

[1] I take no position in this note about whether the WG or
2141bis can take any position at all about f-components.