[Nml-wg] urn:ogf:network specification

[Jeroen van der Ham]

On 07/05/2011 23:14, Freek Dijkstra wrote:
> > Compatibility with GLIF and perfSONAR usage
> > -------------------------------------------
> >
> > The current syntax is compatible with both current usage, although it is
> > now specified that recipients of a URN SHOULD NOT interpret the local
> > part. This is a change from the existing use.
> >
> > Also, the document specifies that the following two URNs are NOT lexical
> > equivalent. I have no opinion on this. Should this be equivalent or not?
> > - urn:ogf:network:example.net:path:2011-0418
> > - urn:ogf:network:domain=example.net:path:2011-0418
I think the "domain=" part is superfluous in the way that we now
construct identifiers. In order to reduce cruft and burden the urn with
legacy from the start, I say that we make them inequivalent.

> >
> > International Characters
> > ------------------------
> >
> > No international characters are allowed. I actually worked out a solid
> > schema (using RFC 5982 and NFKD normalisation that would allow quite a
> > few code points, but still have a very simple URN comparison -- no
> > decoding required.), but decided not to use it.
I have no opinion on this, but the comments on the IETF list make sense.

Jeroen.