Changes between Version 12 and Version 13 of SigMmt/Templates/TemplateIds

Timestamp:

09/15/10 14:37:28 (14 years ago)

Author:

robinbenjamins (IP: 72.236.152.194)

Comment:

--

SigMmt/Templates/TemplateIds

@@ -143 +143 @@
 I fully agree in federation of RDL content.  There is no need to put RDL content in one place.  And separating RDL content at various endpoints based on any reason including ownership, status, etc is fine by me.  So I think we are aligned there.  However, I do not think the identifier issuing authority must be at the endpoint where the RDL thing is being accessed.  It could be the same but there should never be a requirement that it is the same.
 
-If we bind interpretation of status, state, access location, etc of RDL content into the identifier then I think we are in big trouble.  The reason is that the identifier must be forever but its satus, state, location, etc in time and space will not be forever. 
+If we bind interpretation of status, state, access location, etc of RDL content into the identifier then I think we are in big trouble.  The reason is that the identifier must be forever but its status, state, location, etc in time and space will not be forever. 
 
-When http://rdlfacade.org was created it sole purpose was to be an identifier issuing authority.  We never intend initial content of whatever status, state, or location to be originated there or even end up there.
+When http://rdlfacade.org was created its sole purpose was to be an identifier issuing authority.  We never intend initial content of whatever status, state, or location to be originated there or even end up there.
 
 So if you use URI’s in a pure KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) manner, then we can continue to generate identifiers free of its status, state, location, etc and have the most reliable identifiers at the lowest cost possible.