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

[Bob S. <bo...@sc...>]

> From: <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?

Yes, I agree that identifying the schema version is
important for long-term maintainability.

bobs