Re: [IANA #1275238] URN:NAN registration request
John C Klensin <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.urn |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <10759F364A928EECB8146851@PSB> |
--On Friday, June 23, 2023 16:00 -0400 "Dale R. Worley" <[email protected]> wrote: > 4. John asks "What is the difference between an NBN and an > NAN?" It may be that librarians and archivists conceptualize > a difference between the two sets of objects even if from an > informatics point of view they are identical. In any case, > this is a matter for "Community Considerations". Dale, That wasn't quite the question, so let me try again. In general, if these things are resource identifiers, having two identifier types that point to overlapping sets of resources is a good way to cause confusion and other bad things. That doesn't mean it does not happen or that people cannot work around it; we do so all the time. However, it would seem reasonable to expect that, if a new identifier type is to be created and used where another one might exist that overlaps it, the document should say that. This is more than pointing out the similarity in syntax, it is a suggestion that, if there are going to be registration authorities for NBNs and NANs in the same country, they could (SHOULD?) either be the same authority and define where each is appropriate or should have a sufficiently good relationship to definite categories and boundaries. No suggestion of a requirement, only that the spec identify the issue and suggest that either avoiding overlaps or being clear about differences in usage and application would be a good idea. best, john