|
From: | Benja Fallenstein |
Subject: | Re: [Gzz] New PEG: email_storage--marc |
Date: | Tue, 29 Oct 2002 21:38:21 +0100 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020913 Debian/1.1-1 |
Tuomas Lukka wrote:
Ok, that's ok for the enfilade RFC, but I think we should do the Storm one sooner: to get a URN namespace for storm blocks. Currently we use a non-registered namespace, which is bad practice.Hmm. Or we could also just get an unofficial namespace for sha-1 urns.
After thinking more about this after our last discussions, I'm not for using a generic sha-1 namespace: I think it would be good to specify Storm itself, with all its semantics etc. (that a block is a MIME message and so on). I think it would be beneficial to go through the process of making a clear, thought-out specification, and also to have this spec go through the Internet-Draft process, getting comments from outside the group.
OTOH, isn't someone going to propose urn:sha-1 soon?
I haven't heard of anything... - Benja
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |