Subject: Re: [urn] Choice matrix

From: John C Klensin <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2014 10:39:38 -0400

--On Friday, 25 July, 2014 10:29 -0400 "Leslie Daigle (TCE)"
<[email-masked]> wrote:

>  > Can you elaborate on what's the problem with the RFC 3986
> semantics for
>  > queries? (not fragments)???
> 
> RFC2141 set aside the use of "?" because we could not figure
> out how queries (in the URI standard) made sense against _all_
> URNs/URN namespaces.
> 
> And, if they don't make sense for all URNs, it's hard to see
> how to enable them in the URN-wide standard.

I think that is much of the reason why discussions in the last
couple of year about making query syntax available has
concentrated on allowing them in the syntax but allowing their
use only on a per-NID (registration) basis.  That obviously
means we need to figure out appropriate guidance as to what a
processor is expected to do when an URN string is encountered
that contains a query component but for which it makes no sense
and to determine whether we need comparison rules that do
reasonable things (presumably well up the "ladder" described in
3986).   Of course we could conclude that the "appropriate
guidance" or comparison rules  are "do as you will" or "punt".

 best,
    john