Re: TECH Survey comments
Linas Vepstas (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Thu, 4 Aug 1994 12:44:10 -0500
>Date: Wed, 3 Aug 1994 15:21:27 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Brian Behlendorf <email@example.com>
>Subject: Re: TECH Survey comments
>On Tue, 2 Aug 1994, Linas Vepstas wrote:
>> To me, this proposal seems overly complex. I'd rather see a solution
>> that benefits all URL's, rather than just 3D URL's. That is, have some
>> scheme where somehow local servers could serve up popular URL's by serving
>> up a local copy, instead of going over the net. Don't know if anyone
>> is working on this.
>URL's are a subset of URIs, Universal Resource Indicators. I haven't
>looked closely at the issue before, but it's all available at
Yes, of course. I'd forgotten about this. I'll try to educate myself.
>In particular I think we'll make use of URN's:
This makes me a little nervous -- last I checked out the URN discussion,
a year ago, they were talking about making people's fax-machine phone
numbers into URN's. The next twenty notes were devoted to whether or not
beeper numbers were also URN's. Gag. I hope they progressed a bit.
>The basic conclusion: it's being hashed out in other forums and isn't
>something we have to worry too much about. Simply allow objects to
>be referenced as URI's (which include and work like URLs) and we're fine.