Re: [Scrollkeeper-devel] Re: group part of URN

[<las...@Su...>]

> Well, since the URN string as discussed so far is a
> fixed-field string, then all URNs would have to have
> a group (or a blank group field).  Given the already
> large number of fields, I wonder if it is necessary.
> Couldn't Sun (the obvious big organization example 8^)
> coordinate assigning the documument name part?  Make
> the project string part of the name?

:-) As far as Sun is concerned Scrollkeeper's primary purpose is to
support the Gnome Desktop Help. So we would be able to manage the
document names for some time without the "group" field. How about no
"group" field, but we still use "x-omf1" to track the version of the urn
to handle later changes easily?

Laszlo