RE: URN's -- adequate and/or appropriate

ZB Lucas ([email protected])
Mon, 17 Apr 1995 13:33:04 -0700


another idea would be something like the way fonts are handled. this may=
be similar to the URC concept. fonts have a lot of descriptions which a=
llow apps that do not have a selected font available to make a best guess=
and choose a substitution font. =20

this way a browser could turn off some of the downloading options to incr=
ease speed and use just local, internal, or cached representations for so=
me objects. this would be in addition to the URI of the object. this wa=
y a phone might be defined by a URN and a type tag like "Type: Tool/Telep=
hone" and the browser could rep this with a generic local tool image or p=
hone image if available or actually get the object.

jzbl

----------
From: Stephen Mattin[SMTP:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, April 17, 1995 8:28 AM
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: URN's -- adequate and/or appropriate

On Mon, 17 Apr 1995 [email protected] wrote:

>=20
> Mark writes (at the end of his keynote thingy):
> >To construct a dictionary, we must be able to have a universal=20
> >name space for objects, both within an instance of a VRML=20
> >browser, but also, within the Web itself. It should not be necessary =

> >to give the canonical telephone as a WWWInline with some=20
> >complex URL; rather, we should be able to say WWWInline=20
> >"telephone", and let the rest take care of itself. (This assumes that=
=20
> >the canonical telephone is being used.) There are proposals on the=20
> >table for a universal naming mechanism (the Universal Resource=20
> >Name) which spans the entire Web. Such a mechanism is an=20
> >essential part of this extension to VRML. If a likely URN=20
> >candidate does not exist by Midsummer, VRML designers will=20
> >either have to halt further development on scalable worlds, or will=20
> >have to use some other solution, such as ASN-1, to provide a=20
> >universal name space.=20
>=20
> Opinion: I'm not at all sure that, even when it's finished, URN's are
> going to be the *right* mechanism for this.
>=20
>=20

I agree that URNs will not describe "canonical" objects, i.e. classes. Th=
ey
will be location independent references to particular, individual instanc=
es.=20
If you are looking for a "universal name space" to represent concepts, li=
ke
"telephone", that could resolve to different things depending on the refe=
rrer
or the time of reference, URNs are not it. (maybe natural language is?)

Whatever "universal name space" is used, we then need a mapping to URNs. =
=20
For example, Mark's dictionary might contain a "telephone" entry with an
associated URN that could be used to retrieve a particular (virtual)
telephone.

Stephen A. Mattin
Delphi Internet Services Corporation

[email protected]