[urn] Re: Informal URN registration request

Dear Joan,

>> That said, I expect IANA to chose "urn-9".

> Good - was hoping so (and really would not object to a more descriptive name :) -
> or perhaps one that, if you encounter such a URL in the wild, help you to easily
> understand who is responsible for that space `under' urn-9.

I don't know if this is actually part of the process, but maybe you could add a note in the document that the text "urn:example" should be replaced by "urn:urn-9" (or whatever number you get) before the registration is published.

>> As explained in the Assignment section, the namespace owner keeps a 
>> list of all assigned concepts, therefore preventing collisions.
>> Perhaps I should clarify it is the namespace owner who has authority 
>> over what is written in the list.

> I think that would be useful - it can be as simple - the namespace owner
> is responsible for managing the concept names.

> I.e. that goes beyond keeping a list - it actively manages.

Yes, for an informal namespace that ought to be sufficient. I don't think that list needs to be publicly available.

Best,

Lars

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Dirk-Willem van Gulik [mailto:[email protected]] 
Gesendet: Freitag, 31. Juli 2026 14:50
An: J. Ribes <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Betreff: [urn] Re: Informal URN registration request

On 31 Jul 2026, at 13:14, J. Ribes <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Would it be useful to either suggest the long term name space 
>> identifier (NID="example" in below) or suggest/explain how the word 
>> "example" is appropriate ?
> 
> As RFC 8141 explains in Section 5.2, is not up to me to chose the NID.
> I used "example" as a placeholder, as described in RFC 6963.
> 

>> Secondly - I see no discussion of how the entity responsible for the 
>> namespace (i.e. the organisation "example") wants to ensure that 
>> either 1) unrelated actors pick a unique `concept' value -or 2) why 
>> it is no problem if such clashes happen (or perhaps even why this is 
>> desirable). I.e. how the space up to, but not including the 
>> identifier, is managed (or not).
>> I.e. the answer may be `not at all', to a simple - thou shall use a 
>> valid DNS name/date, an enterprise OID number, whatever all the way 
>> to - the 'example' has a whole management system for this.
> 
> As explained in the Assignment section, the namespace owner keeps a 
> list of all assigned concepts, therefore preventing collisions.
> Perhaps I should clarify it is the namespace owner who has authority 
> over what is written in the list.

I think that would be useful - it can be as simple - the namespace owner is responsible for managing the concept names.

I.e. that goes beyond keeping a list - it actively manages.

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

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