URI Format Considerations

[M. Scott Marshall]

Dear All,

PURL software is almost ready that will enable Shared Names to start
testing its future infrastructure. While some issues remain, we seem
to be nearing consensus on the format of the URI's to be served. We've
attempted to summarize recent discussions on a wiki page in
preparation for an initial release of the first Shared Name URI's.
Please see http://sharedname.org/page/URI_Format_Considerations to get
an idea of where things are headed and comment back to the list.

-Scott

--
M. Scott Marshall
Leiden University Medical Center / University of Amsterdam
http://staff.science.uva.nl/~marshall

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Shared names" group.
To post to this group, send email to shared...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to shared-names...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/shared-names?hl=en.

[Melanie Courtot]

Hi,

The wiki page mentions "This page is extracted from Steering Committee
conversations.", are those summarized or available somewhere?
For example the previous proposal at http://sharedname.org/page/Issue/Form_of_URIs
specified the encoding as part of the path, whereas the new one uses
dot-suffixes, without explaining why this is preferred.

Thanks,
Melanie

---
Mélanie Courtot
TFL- BCCRC
675 West 10th Avenue
Vancouver, BC
V5Z 1L3, Canada

[Jonathan Rees]

On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:22 PM, Melanie Courtot <mcou...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The wiki page mentions "This page is extracted from Steering Committee
> conversations.", are those summarized or available somewhere?

I think the reference is to conversations that took place not in the
whole steering committee but among some members. There was not any
kind of steering committee decision. I believe the wiki page (or the
original version of it, see history) *is* the summary you ask for.

> For example the previous proposal at
> http://sharedname.org/page/Issue/Form_of_URIs specified the encoding as part
> of the path, whereas the new one uses dot-suffixes, without explaining why
> this is preferred.

Putting the encoding in the path was necessary to permit use of the
PURL software currently running at OCLC. The later proposal assumes
we'll make use of the new PURLZ software, which can handle suffixes as
part of the redirection rule. This means that under the later proposal
we won't be able to include OCLC in the system until they upgrade (and
even then not unless they're willing to help). That seems OK to me,
but it's up to the steering committee to decide.

Best
Jonathan

> Thanks,
> Melanie
>
> On 20-May-10, at 5:27 PM, M. Scott Marshall wrote:
>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> PURL software is almost ready that will enable Shared Names to start
>> testing its future infrastructure. While some issues remain, we seem
>> to be nearing consensus on the format of the URI's to be served. We've
>> attempted to summarize recent discussions on a wiki page in
>> preparation for an initial release of the first Shared Name URI's.
>> Please see http://sharedname.org/page/URI_Format_Considerations to get
>> an idea of where things are headed and comment back to the list.
>>
>> -Scott
>>
>> --
>> M. Scott Marshall
>> Leiden University Medical Center / University of Amsterdam
>> http://staff.science.uva.nl/~marshall
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Shared names" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to shared...@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to