Subject: final URI scheme question (non-trivial)

From: Michael Mealling <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 10:41:15 -0400

Ok, as far as I can tell this is the final question regarding the
CNRP URI scheme. If we can get this hammered out quickly then
I think we're done with that document:

In Adelaide there was some time spent on just what the PATH portion
of the URI meant. For some it was a convenience since it could
give them the ability to map a path to a CGI script on a web server.
With the decision to put CNRP on a different port this goes away.

For others it was for differentiating between something called a 'dataset'.
The argument goes like this: A Service can have multiple Servers which
can have multiple Datasets. For example, the RealNames Service may
have mutliple disjoint datasets such as Tradenames and Generic Names.
The problem is that this concept of datasets vs Services is
not mentioned in any of our other documents.

If we keep the PATH portion of the URI scheme and give it these semantics
then we have to be clear in the protocol document what a dataset is and why
it isn't just another property. We also have to be clear as to what
the "/" character means here since it specifically allows for
relative addressing according to RFC 2396.

_Please_ respond to this as soon as you can since our end of May deadline
is quickly approaching...

-MM

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Mealling        |      Vote Libertarian!       | www.rwhois.net/michael
Sr. Research Engineer   |   www.ga.lp.org/gwinnett     | ICQ#:         14198821
Network Solutions       |          www.lp.org          |  [email-masked]