Jason Zurawski wrote:
I agree with your synopsis below, and would prefer to see the added information be date based. My only other thought here is if 'year' is granular enough? Should month/day be included too?
I think a year or year+month is probably granular enough. I can see accidental re-assignment of URNs in the course of a decade, but already find it harder to see that happening in the course of a year. If a URN is re-assigned within a year, I can only conclude that the assigning organisation has no proper internal bookkeeping for URNs. Adding a more specific date probably won't improve their bookkeeping. I can still imagine two employees assigning the same URN on the same day to two different resources. On the other hand, I have no objections against adding a month + day. The only drawback is that it adds 6 spurious characters to each URN -- not something I worry about.
Hence, I propose the following syntax for urn:ogf:network identifiers (in ABFR format):
"urn:ogf:network:" DOMAINNAME ":" ASSIGNINGYEAR ":" SNSS
Freek