Re: "xurl?

[Andrew Johnson <andrew@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, 11 Nov 1995, William C. Archibald wrote:
> > At what level should there be a protocol difference for
> >  transcopyrighted material?
> > [ ... a number of interesting observations and arguments elided . . .]
> I think it is valuable to recognize that there are several things
> going on here:
> 	A) Signification of 'Transcopyright'
> 	B) Message Transport Layer
> 	C) Role of URL/URN/URI
> No one would argue that transcopyright is something that should and
> arguably _must_ be differentiated somehow from other types of
> material and services. Thus it is necessary to signify trancopyright.
  Indeed, I wouuld say that the current anarchical state of the net while 
very healthy , would also mandate that any transcopyright system (and any 
system meant to allow commerical publishing) be clearly identified in an 
ubiquitous manner. 
  Using an unique header such as  xu:// would not only help this but would 
also allow the freedom to use a different transport system further down 
the track if neccessary. Transpublication and other electronic 
publication systems have both requirements and importance enough to 
warrent their own classisfaction apart from the broadcast systems 
currently in place.

\ Just my current thought on the subject, i loves to hear concepts from 
\ others :)