Re: [Gzz] New PEG: email_storage--marc

[Benja Fallenstein]

Tuomas Lukka wrote:

> > Ok, that's ok for the enfilade RFC, but I think we should do the Storm 
> > one sooner: to get a URN namespace for storm blocks. Currently we use a 
> > non-registered namespace, which is bad practice.
> >    
>
> Hmm. Or we could also just get an unofficial namespace for sha-1 urns.

After thinking more about this after our last discussions, I'm not for 
using a generic sha-1 namespace: I think it would be good to specify 
Storm itself, with all its semantics etc. (that a block is a MIME 
message and so on). I think it would be beneficial to go through the 
process of making a clear, thought-out specification, and also to have 
this spec go through the Internet-Draft process, getting comments from 
outside the group.

> OTOH, isn't someone going to propose urn:sha-1 soon?

I haven't heard of anything...

- Benja