RE: [dss] plans for next draft

[Trevor Perrin <trevp@trevp.net>]

At 08:08 AM 11/19/2003 -0500, Rich Salz wrote:
>[...]
>In his note, I think Frederick was proposing we do what DSIG did, which is
>define a "base URI"
>         http://www.oasis-open.org/2003/dss#
>And then a timestamp URI just adds a "fragment" to that, as in
>         http://www.oasis-open.org/2003/dss#timestamp
>
>I think OASIS prefers URN's, tho.

This also relates to what target namespace we use for our schema.

I know that OASIS has a URN namespace (RFC 3121):
     urn:oasis:

At one point the OASIS TC guidelines suggested every TC use a base 
namepsace, formed like:
     urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:
     urn:oasis:names:tc:xacml:1.0:

But the TC guidelines [1] no longer say anything about namespaces.

Tim's naming guidelines were to use an http URL.  There was a brief 
discussion on this [2]:

Tim:
"""
- Do we want to use URNs?  I am hoping (perhaps with little justification)
that OASIS will solve the problem of names that cannot be dereferenced to
the object.  If this happens, then we would want to have names that look
like URLs.  If it doesn't happen, then names that are URLs look pretty
silly.
"""

Does anyone know if OASIS is moving to solve this problem?


Anyways, right now for our schema we're using:
     http://www.oasis-open.org/tc/DSS/1.0/core/schema

And for identifiers, we could do something like:
     http://www.oasis-open.org/tc/DSS/1.0/name-format#EmailAddress
     http://www.oasis-open.org/tc/DSS/1.0/name-format#X509SubjectName

Or we could switch to URNs for everything:
     urn:oasis:names:tc:DSS:1.0:core:schema
     urn:oasis:names:tc:DSS:1.0:name-format:EmailAddress
     urn:oasis:names:tc:DSS:1.0:name-format:X509SubjectName


I have no clue which is better, or what the official word is...


Trevor