[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Access XML

• To: John Cowan <cowan@m...>
• Subject: Re: Access XML
• From: "Alaric B. Snell" <alaric@a...>
• Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 11:29:39 +0000
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <E18vy8Q-0000J0-00@m...>
• References: <E18vy8Q-0000J0-00@m...>

On Thursday 20 March 2003 11:22, John Cowan wrote:
> Alaric B. Snell scripsit:
> > ...making a URN namespace that looks like:
> >
> > urn:domain:alaric-snell.com:wibble
> >
> > ...would make sense IMHO; the rules being that the owner of a domain in
> > DNS can generate URNs as she sees fit that follow the rule
>
> The trouble is that domain names can and do change hands,

So can any kind of registry entry.

> and there is
> no protection against different owners issuing colliding URNs. 

No system has any such protection unless you mandate digital signature based 
protections; if a name is published, then anyone else can decide they're 
going to use the same name for something else.

> So a
> date has to be involved, and IMHO should be involved in *every* namespace
> name, whether URL or URN, where the DNS is being relied on at all.

That's moving towards a 'big ugly number' scheme - where lots of numeric data 
are pushed together to ensure uniqueness. UUIDs are the best example of these 
in commmon use; they would make good URNs in many ways, but are a bastard to 
remember :-)

ABS

-- 
A city is like a large, complex, rabbit
 - ARP

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Access XML
    • From: John Cowan <cowan@m...>

• References:
  • Re: Access XML
    • From: John Cowan <cowan@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Access XML
• Next by Date: Re: Access XML
• Previous by thread: Re: Access XML
• Next by thread: Re: Access XML
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread