Re: Revised registration request for URN:NAN

Peter Saint-Andre <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.urn
Message-ID <[email protected]>
The NAN namespace has been added to the registry.

On 8/4/23 8:19 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> Thank you, Stephanie and Juha.
> 
> I will ask IANA to add this namespace to the registry.
> 
> Peter
> 
> On 8/4/23 1:05 AM, Palek, Stephanie wrote:
>> Dear all,
>>
>>
>> I approve as well and have no further comments.
>>
>>
>> All the best,
>>
>>
>> Stephanie
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> *Von:* urn <[email protected]> im Auftrag von Hakala, Juha E 
>> <[email protected]>
>> *Gesendet:* Freitag, 4. August 2023 07:11:15
>> *An:* Peter Saint-Andre; KA Urnnan; [email protected]
>> *Betreff:* Re: [urn] Revised registration request for URN:NAN
>> Hello,
>>
>> I approve of this registration, and look forward to the co-operation 
>> between the National Library and the National Archive in the 
>> implementation of this new identifier system.
>>
>> Juha
>>
>> -----Alkuperäinen viesti-----
>> Lähettäjä: urn <[email protected]> Puolesta Peter Saint-Andre
>> Lähetetty: torstai 3. elokuuta 2023 21.31
>> Vastaanottaja: KA Urnnan <[email protected]>; [email protected]
>> Aihe: Re: [urn] Revised registration request for URN:NAN
>>
>> Hello Lauri,
>>
>> Thank you for this note and for the updated registration request. I 
>> approve of registration. Once we hear back from other members of the 
>> expert review team, I can work with you on a few small editorial 
>> matters and ask IANA to complete the registration.
>>
>> Peter
>>
>> On 8/1/23 9:59 AM, KA Urnnan wrote:
>>> Dear recipients,
>>>
>>> Thank you all for an elightening conversation and on-point 
>>> corrections to the registration request, and apologies for the 
>>> tardiness of my reply; I was on vacation, and due to technical 
>>> equipment failure was unable to access my work email. I have amended 
>>> the request according to the helpful suggestions. Please find  the 
>>> resubmission attached.
>>>
>>> On a general note, I could try to conceptualize the difference 
>>> between NBN and NAN. The main difference stems from the identified 
>>> material itself, and reflects the well established practices of 
>>> division of responsibility between libraries and archives. While the 
>>> NBN is assigned to published material that does not have 
>>> publisher-issued identifier and concerns mainly works of 
>>> literary/bookish nature (e.g. master’s theses, ephemera), the NAN 
>>> will be assigned to archival material. Or in other words unique, 
>>> unpublished and often non-literary (in the strict sense) primary 
>>> sources (e.g. letters, charters, minutes, manuscripts, maps, 
>>> drawings, etc.). While NBN could be assigned to e.g. a self-published 
>>> autobiography lacking an ISBN, and it would identify the (in FRBR 
>>> terms) work-expression-manifestation -levels, NANs could be assigned 
>>> to the work’s authorial working manuscript and notes associated to 
>>> it, and similar item-level objects (again in FRBR-terms). In other 
>>> words, there should be not much conceptual or factual overlap in the 
>>> material that NBN and NAN refer to. The other main difference lies in 
>>> the organisation of materials. Archival sources are organised into 
>>> hierarchical structure consisting of archival entities, series and 
>>> units, all of which can be given unique identifiers. Thus the 
>>> resource which is identified with a NAN number is very much different 
>>> from that identified with a NBN number.
>>>
>>> Mainly for these conceptual reasons the NBN as identifier for 
>>> archival material is out of the question. It has well established and 
>>> defined usage which does not lend itself for use with archival sources.
>>> Assigning NBN’s for our material would only create confusion in the 
>>> field. The only main exception (that I can think of) to the division 
>>> of material described above concerns some older historical sources, 
>>> mainly of literary nature (e.g. late medieval manuscripts and 
>>> letters). Such material can be found in both libraries’ and archives’ 
>>> collections for historical reasons. Yet, this material has only 
>>> rarely been assigned any NBN:s, and the overlap remains therefore 
>>> minimal in terms of magnitude as well as conceptually. Since the 
>>> practices between archives and libaries are well established, I found 
>>> it unnecessary to list this as a restriction in the registration. 
>>> While it leaves open the definition of pertinent material, this might 
>>> also mean that URN:NAN could help to fill in the gaps left by URN:NBN 
>>> in the identification of archival collections in libraries. It also 
>>> leaves the door open for national archives to implement their own 
>>> practices as they see fit. Hopefully this attempt of clarification 
>>> answers at least some of the questions raised.
>>>
>>> Regarding the informational RFC: at the moment I would personally see 
>>> it as an overextension of preliminary definitions. Once URN:NAN has 
>>> been implemented by us and at least a few other national archives, 
>>> however, I believe it would be definitely useful to write one. At 
>>> that point in time we would have experience of usage, understanding 
>>> of the most pertinent questions, borderline cases and problems 
>>> encountered, and would be the better able to formulate necessary 
>>> clarifications to using URN:NAN.
>>>
>>> Looking forward to hearing from you,
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Lauri Leinonen
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> urn mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/urn 
>> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/urn>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> urn mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/urn 
>> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/urn>
>> _______________________________________________
>> urn mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/urn 
>> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/urn>
> 

_______________________________________________
urn mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/urn
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.