[urn] Re: Informal URN Namespace Registration Request for Tr ivore Corp.

"Kari Mattsson (Trivore)" <[email protected]> writes:
> What you pointed out below is exactly our current state with Trivore
> ID product.  I am very frank with you, it is currently a mess. I
> personally do not like the current state.  We have scopes and claims
> with https prefix, and we have plain strings.  Those current url
> scopes and claims are already internally deprecated, and will be
> changed to urn based on this registration "urn:trviore".  This
> registration is part of that.
>
> We are modifying all those to what is according to new standard,
> showing up those urn scopes and claims in the documentation in the
> future releases. Trivore ID is a 10 year old product already and being
> actively use by millions of people.  Refactoring is currently being
> done.
>
> I hope this clarified the current state.

OK, yes, with the understanding that Trivore intends to update its scope
and claim names to conform to the urn:trivore syntax, the registration
looks good to me.  We have approved a lot of registrations whose syntaxes
were considerably broader than the registrants intended to utilize in the
foreseeable future.  But as long as the registrant is aware of good URN
usage, the IETF does not need to supervise the details of the
registrant's usage.

Dale

_______________________________________________
urn mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]