Comments on: Is the web sticky enough? http://masonlee.org/2009/08/21/is-the-web-sticky-enough/ home page and weblog Sat, 14 Jan 2012 18:34:39 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: Mason Lee http://masonlee.org/2009/08/21/is-the-web-sticky-enough/#comment-245 Mon, 23 Nov 2009 23:29:41 +0000 http://masonlee.wordpress.com/?p=91#comment-245 The Tag URI scheme (RFC4151) looks like a nice method for minting URIs that are globally unique across time. They aren’t network resolvable by nature, though.
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4151.txt

]]> By: Mason Lee http://masonlee.org/2009/08/21/is-the-web-sticky-enough/#comment-226 Wed, 07 Oct 2009 00:56:16 +0000 http://masonlee.wordpress.com/?p=91#comment-226 Just found this briefing paper on the same topic:
http://www.digitalpreservationeurope.eu/publications/briefs/persistent_identifiers.pdf

]]> By: Mason Lee http://masonlee.org/2009/08/21/is-the-web-sticky-enough/#comment-204 Tue, 25 Aug 2009 09:13:09 +0000 http://masonlee.wordpress.com/?p=91#comment-204 Textbook examples of Atom feed elements use GUIDs as IDs. The nice thing about these is you don’t need a central authority to generate them, they are just probably unique. Here is a scheme for generating them and for representing them as URIs:

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4122.txt

RFC 4122 uses 128 bit IDs. Using 256-bits would get you almost enough IDs to assign one to every atom in the universe (Est. 10^80). (Did God use 256-bit IDs and run out of space?)

How resource IDs fit in with versioning is an interesting question…

]]> By: Mason Lee http://masonlee.org/2009/08/21/is-the-web-sticky-enough/#comment-203 Tue, 25 Aug 2009 09:05:20 +0000 http://masonlee.wordpress.com/?p=91#comment-203 @plaggypig Thanks. I agree, the re-assignability of memorable names is important for some systems. An audit trail maintained at the DNS level wouldn’t be able to tell you if path-named resources were reassigned. Can you explain more your thinking?

]]> By: @plaggypig http://masonlee.org/2009/08/21/is-the-web-sticky-enough/#comment-202 Sat, 22 Aug 2009 04:50:02 +0000 http://masonlee.wordpress.com/?p=91#comment-202 Individuals and businesses need to trade names that fit their particular interests and markets. A namespace that didn’t cater for this demand would be a pretty unattractive one.

I dare say if identifiers weren’t reassignable then the process of registration would probably have to be qualified with checks that applicants are eligible to own any particular name, thereby raising the cost and reducing participation.

But anyway, couldn’t the problem be mitigated with an audit trail? The governing authority (TLD registry) could log a timestamp whenever a domain is transferred between registrants, and provide a list of these historical changes (via whois).

I’m loving your blog Mason, this is a great discussion.

]]>