[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Submission draft-goodwin-iso-urn-00.txt -- application for a formal NID

To: ids at ietf.org, urn-nid at apps.ietf.org
Subject: Submission draft-goodwin-iso-urn-00.txt -- application for a formal NID
From: Goodwin <goodwin at iso.org>
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 11:15:30 +0200
Cc: 'SC' <clivio at iso.org>, 'Holger Apel' <apel at iso.org>, rinta-filppula at iso.org, mckinley at iso.org
In-reply-to: <3525.10.31.30.121.1143477427.squirrel@stiedprstage1>
List-help: <mailto:urn-nid-request@apps.ietf.org?subject=help>
List-id: discussion of new namespace identifiers for URNs <urn-nid.apps.ietf.org>
List-post: <mailto:urn-nid@apps.ietf.org>
List-subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/urn-nid>, <mailto:urn-nid-request@apps.ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/urn-nid>, <mailto:urn-nid-request@apps.ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Organization: ISO
Reply-to: goodwin at iso.org
Thread-index: AcZRvLKs+Ho8VdATQf6lf9EOw+nUoAAf/8EA

Please find attached a renamed file for application for a formal NID.

If there is anything else that needs to be done to assure submission could
you please let us know as soon as possible.

With best wishes

Joanna Goodwin 

-----Original Message-----
From: ids at ietf.org [mailto:ids at ietf.org] 
Sent: 2006-03-27 18:37
To: goodwin at iso.org
Cc: mckinley at iso.org; 'SC'; 'Holger Apel'; rinta-filppula at iso.org
Subject: RE: Request for status of submission draft-iso-urn-00.txt

Please read below, it says about the file name. Correct and resubmit.
Thank you.

7. Naming and Submitting
Internet-Draft filenames have four parts, separated with hyphens and which
may themselves contain hyphens:

All Internet-Draft filenames begin with "draft"
Document source:
Individual
The name of the submitter (one of the authors). This can be a surname, a
given name, or an email address used by an author, as specified in the
Authors' Addresses section of the draft.


> I'm sorry but I'm not sure that I understand. Do you mean that the 
> current file name "draft-iso-urn-00.txt" is incorrect? If so, could 
> you tell me what file name we should use (we thought that we had 
> complied with the rules)?
>
> If not, please note that I submitted the file with this name on 
> 2006-02-09.
> I have attached a copy of that mail as well as another copy of the file.
>
> We are anxious to progress this submission and so any assistance that 
> you can provide would be greatly appreciated.
>
> With best wishes
>
> Joanna Goodwin
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: internet-drafts at ietf.org [mailto:internet-drafts at ietf.org]
> Sent: 2006-03-23 20:56
> To: goodwin at iso.org
> Subject: RE: Request for status of submission draft-iso-urn-00.txt
>
> Please resubmit with corrected file name.
>
> Thank you.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Goodwin [mailto:goodwin at iso.org]
> Sent: 2006-03-21 18:56
> To: 'ids at ietf.org'
> Subject: RE: Request for status of submission draft-iso-urn-00.txt
>
>> Would it be possible to receive some information regarding the status 
>> of the submission draft-iso-urn-00.txt.
>>
>> With best wishes
>>
>> Jo Goodwin
>>
>> Manager, Production Services
>> Standards Department
>> International Organization for Standardization (ISO)
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Goodwin [mailto:goodwin at iso.org]
>> Sent: 2006-03-10 16:34
>> To: 'ids at ietf.org'
>> Subject: Request for status of submission draft-iso-urn-00.txt
>>
>> Thanks very much for the reply. I realize that you must have many 
>> documents
>> -- sorry -- that is why I had replied to a previous mail to which the 
>> draft was attached. Now I know the system I'll make sure I put the 
>> file name in the subject line.
>>
>> Looking forwards to hearing from you
>>
>> Best wishes
>>
>> Jo Goodwin
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ids at ietf.org [mailto:ids at ietf.org]
>> Sent: 2006-03-10 15:55
>> To: goodwin at iso.org
>> Subject: RE: Application for a formal NID
>>
>> Hi Jo,
>>
>> Let me explain you a little bit a process of draft posting. We 
>> usually receive hundreds of drafts (before the meeting the number is 
>> close to thousand). We post them in a timely manner and in order of
receiving.
>>
>> I would of course inform you about the status of your draft if I have 
>> the file name. Please in the future when you request posting or 
>> status always in the Subject line give us the file name of the draft. 
>> This will help us to more quickly respond you.
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Goodwin [mailto:goodwin at iso.org]
> Sent: 2006-03-07 12:15
> To: 'internet-drafts at ietf.org'; 'urn-nid at apps.ietf.org'
> Subject: RE: Application for a formal NID
>
>>> Could I please enquire as to the status of this submission.
>>>
>>> With best wishes
>>>
>>> Jo Goodwin
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Goodwin [mailto:goodwin at iso.org]
>>> Sent: 2006-02-09 14:34
>>> To: 'internet-drafts at ietf.org'
>>> Subject: RE: Application for a formal NID
>>>
>>> As far as I understand your rules, I have altered the file name 
>>> accordingly.
>>> Please find the renamed file attached.
>>>
>>> With best regards
>>>
>>> Jo Goodwin
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: internet-drafts at ietf.org [mailto:internet-drafts at ietf.org]
>>> Sent: 2006-02-08 22:40
>>> To: goodwin at iso.org
>>> Subject: RE: Application for a formal NID
>>>
>>> Please make sure that the draft-rfc-urn-iso-12 file name is correct.
>>> And then resubmit.
>>>
>>> Thank you.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Dear Secretariat
>>>>
>>>> I have carried out all the modifications listed and have updated 
>>>> the date and version number of the draft.
>>>>
>>>> Please find the revised file attached. If I need to do anything 
>>>> more in order for this draft to be accepted I'd be grateful if you 
>>>> would let me know.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks again for your help.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards
>>>>
>>>> Jo Goodwin
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: internet-drafts at ietf.org [mailto:internet-drafts at ietf.org]
>>>> Sent: 2006-02-02 20:05
>>>> To: goodwin at iso.org
>>>> Subject: RE: Application for a formal NID
>>>>
>>>> The Secretariat CANNOT process your Internet-Draft submission due 
>>>> to following reason(s):
>>>>
>>>>  * All Internet-Drafts must have on the first page an intellectual 
>>>> property rights (IPR) statement that says:
>>>>
>>>> By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any 
>>>> applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware 
>>>> have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes 
>>>> aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
>>>>
>>>> If you are using xml2rfc, this can be accomplished by updating the 
>>>> 'ipr'
>>>> attribute in the 'rfc' element to refer to 3978. See 
>>>> http://xml.resource.org/authoring/draft-mrose-writing-rfcs.html#ipr
>>>> for more information.
>>>>
>>>>  * All Internet-Drafts must include the following statement:
>>>>
>>>> Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  * All Internet-Drafts must include the following statement:
>>>>
>>>> This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions 
>>>> contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors 
>>>> retain all their rights.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  * All Internet-Drafts must include the following statement:
>>>>
>>>> This document and the information contained herein are provided on 
>>>> an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE 
>>>> REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND 
>>>> THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, 
>>>> EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT 
>>>> THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR 
>>>> ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR
PURPOSE.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  * All Internet-Drafts must contain the full filename (beginning 
>>>> with
>>>> draft-
>>>> and including the version number) in the text of the document.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  * All Internet-Drafts must include the following statements:
>>>>
>>>> Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 
>>>> Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that 
>>>> other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts.
>>>> Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six 
>>>> months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other 
>>>> documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts 
>>>> as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
>>>>
>>>> The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 
>>>> http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html
>>>>
>>>> The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 
>>>> http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  * All Internet-Drafts must have an Abstract section.
>>>>
>>>>  * All Internet-Drafts should contain a section giving the name(s) 
>>>> and contact information for the authors.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Apologies for the silence - I have been sick for the last few days.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please find attached the document as a txt as requested.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks again for your help. Best regards
>>>>>
>>>>> Jo Goodwin
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: internet-drafts at ietf.org [mailto:internet-drafts at ietf.org]
>>>>> Sent: 2006-01-27 20:20
>>>>> To: goodwin at iso.org
>>>>> Subject: RE: Application for a formal NID
>>>>>
>>>>> You should send it in a plan TXT file. Please resubmit.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello Dinara
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks very much for the offer -- I really appreciate it. For 
>>>>>> your information, I did check the draft (even before I sent it 
>>>>>> the last
>>>>>> time) against the I-D checklist that Leslie Daigle kindly pointed 
>>>>>> me towards and thought that the draft complied in all respects 
>>>>>> except that the Contents was not ragged right (but it was that 
>>>>>> way in the example file that I had been given so decided that it 
>>>>>> was probably ok), and I wasn't sure that the draft complied with 
>>>>>> the rule "It must not contain boilerplate that prohibits 
>>>>>> publication as an
>> RFC"
>>>>>> (but since I didn't/don't know what such boilerplate might be I 
>>>>>> cannot judge whether it does or does not comply with this rule).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have also looked at the Guidelines, but not being familiar with 
>>>>>> the IETF terminology I'm no longer even sure whether I'm 
>>>>>> submitting an RFC or an Internet draft -- I thought I was 
>>>>>> submitting an RFC but maybe I'm
>>>>> wrong?
>>>>>> So
>>>>>> I really appreciate any help that you can provide me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have attached the draft, and look forwards to receiving your 
>>>>>> reply.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best wishes
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jo Goodwin
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: internet-drafts at ietf.org [mailto:internet-drafts at ietf.org]
>>>>>> Sent: 2006-01-25 21:26
>>>>>> To: goodwin at iso.org
>>>>>> Subject: RE: Application for a formal NID
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello Jo,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would suggest you to submit your draft. As we receive it, we 
>>>>>> will check it for correctness. If everthing is okey, we post it
>>>>>> --- if not, we will send you a message telling what and where you 
>>>>>> should add. I think this is the better solution for the question.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thank you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dinara Suleymanova
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks for the info. As you can see I have no experience in the 
>>>>>>> submission of such documents, but am willing to learn.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have had a quick look at the document you gave a link to below 
>>>>>>> and have noticed that at least a certain number of the things 
>>>>>>> mentioned appear to be related to boilerplate texts. I searched 
>>>>>>> the guidelines to see whether there was a mention of a template 
>>>>>>> but could find no mention. Would it be possible to provide me 
>>>>>>> with a link to a template or alternatively to provide me with an 
>>>>>>> example of what you would consider to be a good draft?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks in advance
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jo Goodwin
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: internet-drafts at ietf.org [mailto:internet-drafts at ietf.org]
>>>>>>> Sent: 2006-01-24 19:49
>>>>>>> To: goodwin at iso.org
>>>>>>> Cc: 'Leslie Daigle'; urn-nid at apps.ietf.org; clivio at iso.org; 
>>>>>>> 'Apel Holger'; 'Rinta-Filppula Pasi'; mckinley at iso.org
>>>>>>> Subject: RE: Application for a formal NID
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please find here the link which weill help you to properly 
>>>>>>> compose a draft.
>>>>>>> As soon as you have all necessary statements in the drafts, etc, 
>>>>>>> please resubmit.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-guidelines.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thank you.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The revised version is now ready and is attached. Thank you for 
>>>>>>>> your indulgence.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please do not hesitate to let me know if there's anything else 
>>>>>>>> that is required on my/our part.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> With best wishes
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Joanna Goodwin
>>>>>>>> Manager, Production Services
>>>>>>>> Standards Department
>>>>>>>> International Organization for Standardization (ISO)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>> From: Leslie Daigle [mailto:leslie at thinkingcat.com]
>>>>>>>> Sent: 2006-01-19 18:42
>>>>>>>> To: goodwin at iso.org
>>>>>>>> Cc: urn-nid at apps.ietf.org; clivio at iso.org; 'Apel Holger'; 
>>>>>>>> 'Rinta-Filppula Pasi'; mckinley at iso.org
>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Application for a formal NID
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Howdy,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I look forward to the revised version.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> RFC3406 does actually stipulate the requirement:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's implicit here:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>    Thus, the Formal NID application is made via publication of 
>>>>>>>>> an RFC
>>>>>>>>>    through standard IETF processes.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (standard IETF processes begin with I-D publication) and 
>>>>>>>> spelled out in the detailed appendix:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>      2. Send the Internet-Draft to the I-D editor, and send a 
>>>>>>>>> copy to
>>>>>>>>>          urn-nid at apps.ietf.org for technical review.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If/when RFC3406 gets revised, I can see making that much more 
>>>>>>>> explicit upfront, particularly for people who aren't as 
>>>>>>>> immediately involved in the IETF work as some.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Leslie.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Goodwin wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Thanks for your mail. I had attached the draft to the e-mail 
>>>>>>>>> that I sent.
>>>>>>>>> Sorry about not putting it in the IETF Internet-Draft 
>>>>>>>>> repository
>>>>>>>>> -- can't see that RFC 3406 mentions that it is necessary to do 
>>>>>>>>> this.
>>>>>>>>> Is this rule given in another document that I should have read?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Since submitting this draft in December, I have received a 
>>>>>>>>> request from one of our TCs to alter the draft slightly.
>>>>>>>>> Accordingly I will submit a slightly revised draft next week.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Please accept my apologies for any inconvenience caused.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> With best wishes
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Joanna Goodwin
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>>> From: Leslie Daigle [mailto:leslie at thinkingcat.com]
>>>>>>>>> Sent: 2006-01-10 19:08
>>>>>>>>> To: goodwin at iso.org
>>>>>>>>> Cc: urn-nid at apps.ietf.org; clivio at iso.org; 'Apel Holger'; 
>>>>>>>>> 'Rinta-Filppula Pasi'; mckinley at iso.org
>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Application for a formal NID
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> As noted by the list moderator, a number of messages were held 
>>>>>>>>> up in the moderation queue until January 6, 2006 -- so we did 
>>>>>>>>> not see your message until then.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> For this request -- I am unable to find the document in the 
>>>>>>>>> IETF Internet-Draft repository.  Could you please provide the 
>>>>>>>>> exact pointer, or make sure to submit the document there if 
>>>>>>>>> you have not already
>>>>>>>> done so[*].
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>> Leslie.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> [*] See http://www.ietf.org/ID.html
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Goodwin wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Dear IETF org
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Please find attached an application for a formal NID from the 
>>>>>>>>>>International Organization for Standardization (ISO). Should 
>>>>>>>>>>you require any further information, please do not hesitate to 
>>>>>>>>>>contact us.
>>>>>>>>>>In the meantime please accept our best wishes for the festive 
>>>>>>>>>>season.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Best regards
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Joanna Goodwin
>>>>>>>>>>Manager, Production Services
>>>>>>>>>>Standards Department
>>>>>>>>>>International Organization for Standardization (ISO)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>

Network Working Group J. Goodwin
Request for Comments: nnnn ISO
Category: Informational February 2006

A Uniform Resource Name (URN) Namespace for
the International Organization for Standardization (ISO)
draft-goodwin-iso-urn-00.txt

Status of this Memo

This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.

This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.

This document and the information contained herein are provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html

The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html

Abstract

This document describes a Uniform Resource Name Namespace Identification (URN NID) for the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). This URN NID is intended for use for the identification of persistent resources published by the ISO standards body (including documents, document metadata, extracted resources such as standard schemata and standard value sets, and other resources).

Table of Contents

1. Introduction 3
2. Specification Template 4
Namespace ID: 4
Registration Information: 4
Declared registrant of the namespace: 4
Declaration of structure 4
Relevant ancillary documentation: 12
Identifier uniqueness considerations: 13
Identifier persistence considerations: 13
Process for identifier resolution: 13
Rules for lexical equivalence: 14
Conformance with URN Syntax: 14
Validation mechanism: 14
Scope: 14
3. Namespace Considerations 14
Requirements: 14
Alternative naming schemes: 15
4. Community Considerations 17
5. IANA Considerations 18
6. Security Considerations 18
7. References 18
8. Author's Address 19
9. Full Copyright Statement 19

1. Introduction

The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) was created by international agreement in 1947. ISO is a network of the national standards institutes of many countries, on the basis of one member per country, with a Central Secretariat in Geneva, Switzerland, that coordinates the system. ISO acts as a bridging organization in which a consensus can be reached on solutions that meet both the requirements of business and the broader needs of society, such as the needs of stakeholder groups like consumers and users.

(Further information is provided at http://www.iso.org/iso/en/aboutiso/introduction/index.html.)

The core mission of ISO is to develop technical standards constituting technical agreements which provide the framework for compatible technology worldwide. ISO standards contribute to making the development, manufacturing and supply of products and services more efficient, safer and cleaner. They make trade between countries easier and fairer.

Every participating ISO member institute (full members) has the right to take part in the development of any standard which it judges to be important to its country's economy. No matter what the size or strength of that economy, each participating member in ISO has one vote. ISO's activities are thus carried out in a democratic framework where each country is on an equal footing to influence the direction of ISO's work at the strategic level, as well as the technical content of its individual standards. Although ISO standards are voluntary, the fact that they are developed in response to market demand, and are based on consensus among the interested parties, ensures widespread applicability of the standards. Consensus, like technology, evolves and ISO takes account both of evolving technology and of evolving interests by requiring a review of its standards at least every five years to decide whether they should be maintained, updated or withdrawn.

ISO publishes International Standards and other technical specifications that are cited in the definitions of required or expected practices in many industries in many nations. These specifications contain dictionaries of standard terms, catalogues of reference values, definitions of formal languages, formal schemata for information capture and exchange, specifications for standard practices, and other information resources of general use to international trade and industry. ISO wishes to create and manage globally unique, persistent, location-independent identifiers for these resources.

This specification defines the syntax for URNs that identify documents developed by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) in accordance with the standards development procedures defined in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1 [1] and the ISO supplement [2] and processed by the ISO Central Secretariat. The syntax extends to identify document metadata and resources related to these documents or otherwise associated with them. It does not extend to products derived from these documents and published by ISO (e.g. handbooks, compendia) or documents at or below the Technical Committee level. Revisions of this specification may define syntax for URNs in this namespace that identify other ISO objects, when the ISO community defines a requirement for such identifiers.

2. Specification Template

Namespace ID:

"iso"

Registration Information:

Version 1.3
Date: 2006-02-09

Declared registrant of the namespace:

J. Goodwin
ISO Central Secretariat
International Organization for Standardization (ISO)
Case Postale 56
CH-1211 Genève 20
Switzerland

E-mail: goodwin at iso.org

Declaration of structure

The Namespace Specific Strings (NSS) of all URNs assigned by ISO will conform to the syntax defined in section 2.2 of RFC 2141 [3].

The NSS has the following ABNF [4] specification:

NSS = std-nss

All URNs conforming to this specification begin the NSS with the prefix "std:", to denote the restriction to documents developed by the ISO standards development procedures as defined in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1 [1] and the ISO Supplement [2]. Prefixes that identify ISO objects of other kinds may be defined in future revisions of this specification.

std-nss = "std:" docidentifier *supplements *docelement [additions]

The prefix "std:" distinguishes an "std-nss".
An std-nss identifies the ISO document that is designated by the "docidentifier", as extended or modified by any identified "supplements". (An std-nss that identifies all parts of a multipart ISO document is a special case as described under the element "partnumber".) If the std-nss contains an "additions" element, the NSS identifies a resource extracted from the ISO document or otherwise associated with it (see below).

docidentifier = originator [":" type] ":" docnumber
[":" partnumber] ([":" status ":" edition]/
[":" edition])[":" docversion] [":" language]

"docidentifier" provides the complete identification of an ISO document. Each of its component elements is described below.

originator = "iso" / "iso-iec" / "iso-cie" / "iso-astm" /
"iso-ieee" / "iec"

"originator" the organization (usually an international body) from which a document emanates.

Current values:

iso = International Organization for Standardization
iec = International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), or
Commission internationale électrotechnique (CIE)
iso-iec = jointly developed by ISO and IEC
iso-cie = jointly developed by ISO and the
Commission internationale d'éclairage (CEI)
iso-astm = jointly developed by ISO and the American Society
for Testing and Materials International (ASTM)
iso-ieee = jointly developed by ISO and the Institute for
Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)

Revisions of this specification may define additional values.

type = "data" / "guide" / "isp" / "iwa" / "pas" /
"r" / "tr" / "ts" /"tta"

"type" designates the ISO deliverable type. If the "type" element is not present, the classification is "international standard". Other current values:

data = Data (document type no longer published)
guide = Guide
isp = International Standardized Profile
iwa = International Workshop Agreement
pas = Publicly Available Specification
r = Recommendation (document type no longer published)
tr = Technical Report
ts = Technical Specification
tta = Technology Trends Assessment

docnumber = DIGITS

"docnumber" is the reference number assigned to the document by ISO and/or IEC. An ISO document may comprise a single document, or two or more separate parts each of which is identified by "partnumber".

partnumber = "-" +( DIGIT / ALPHA / "-" )

"partnumber" is the reference number that identifies a part of a multipart standard.

Where it is required to refer to a multipart ISO document in its entirety, this can be designated by omitting the "partnumber" element. However, this precludes the possibility of using any further elements except "additions".

NOTE This option has been included to align with the provision in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2, 2004 [7] subclause 6.2.2 of making an undated reference to all parts of an ISO document. It is only permissible to use this option where the URN is referring to a multipart ISO document in its entirety. Since the use of this option precludes the designation of the elements "status" and "edition", it is implicit that the URN needs to remain valid irrespective of any future changes to the multipart document (see the rules for undated references given in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2, 2004 [7] subclause 6.6.7.5.2). This shall be taken into consideration in the use (and maintenance) of any URN specification employing this option.

NOTE In the case where the multipart document comprises different types of ISO deliverable, the "type" of the core part (usually part 1) applies. See the example "Reference to a resource related to all parts of a multipart document".

Except for the case where it is required to refer to a multipart document in its entirety, this element is required if the identified resource is a part of an ISO document. Otherwise, this element is not used.

status = ( "draft" / "cancelled" ) / stage
stage = "stage-" stagecode ["." iteration]

"status" indicates the publication status of the document.
When the "status" element is not present, the NSS refers to a published document. Other values:

draft = document that has not yet been accepted for publication by international ballot

cancelled = document that has been deleted or withdrawn

"stage" indicates the stage code and iteration of the document.

stagecode = DIGIT DIGIT "." DIGIT DIGIT

"stagecode" is the harmonized stage code in accordance with ISO Guide 69:1999, "Harmonized Stage Code system (Edition 2) -- Principles and guidelines for use" [5].

iteration = "v" DIGIT

"iteration" is a sequential number which refers to a specific iteration of the project's lifecycle through the designated stage

NOTE In the ISO Central Secretariat project management database the "iteration" is referred to as the "project version".

If no "iteration" is specified the reference is to the highest iteration available for the specified stagecode.

edition = "ed-" DIGIT

"edition" designates a specific edition of the document. (The DIGIT is the (sequential) edition number.) If no "edition" is specified, the NSS refers to the latest edition.

docversion = "v" (simpleversion / isoversion)

simpleversion = DIGIT

"docversion" designates the version number of a document?s "edition". It is altered by correction (corrected version; Technical Corrigendum) or amendment (Amendment; Addendum) and is distinct from a revision, which changes the edition number.

In the "simpleversion", the first version published is "1", and each subsequent correction or amendment increases the version number by 1.

If no "docversion" is specified, the reference is to the highest version number available for the denoted "edition".

Current values:

1 first version published
2 corrected version published

isoversion = baseversion *includedsuppl
baseversion = DIGIT
includedsuppl = "-" suppltype supplnumber [ "." supplversion ]

An "isoversion" can be linked to a simpleversion by defining an existing simpleversion as baseversion and listing all the "supplements" (corrections and amendments) incorporated into that version.

Examples for the "isoversion" (internal ISO version) scheme:

1 = first version of standard

1-amd1.v1 = first version of standard incorporating first version of Amendment 1

1-amd1.v1-amd2.v1 = first version of standard incorporating first version of Amendment 1 and first version of Amendment 2

1-amd1.v2-amd2.v1-amd3 = first version of standard incorporating corrected version of Amendment 1, first version of Amendment 2, and highest version of Amendment 3

1-cor3 = first version of standard incorporating highest version of Technical Corrigendum 3

1-amd1-cor3 = first version of standard incorporating highest version of Amendment 1 and highest version of Technical Corrigendum 3

language = monolingual / bilingual / trilingual
monolingual = "en" / "fr" / "ru" / "es" / "ar"
bilingual = "en-fr" / "en-ru" / "fr-ru"
trilingual = "en-fr-ru"

"language" designates the official ISO language(s), or the language of a certified translation, in which the document (object) is processed and published by ISO (excluding languages which constitute only specific elements of the content). The value is one or more alpha-2 codes, each of which designates a language, as specified in ISO 639-1 [6]. If no language element is specified, "en" is assumed.

supplements = ":" suppltype ":" supplnumber
[":" supplversion ] [":" language ]
suppltype = "amd" / "cor" / "add"
supplnumber = DIGIT
supplversion = "v" DIGIT

"supplements" designate technical alterations of or additions to an ISO standard that do not result in a new "edition" or "version". Supplements are of three types, designated by "suppltype":

"amd" = Amendment -- a document that alters and/or adds to
previously agreed technical provisions in an existing ISO document; an amendment is subject to acceptance by ballot in accordance with the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1, 2004 [1] subclause 2.10.3
"cor" = Technical Corrigendum -- a document that corrects a
technical error or ambiguity, or updates the ISO document in such a way that the modification has no effect on the technical normative elements; a Technical Corrigendum is not balloted -- see the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1, 2004 [1] subclause 2.10.2
"add" = Addendum -- (document type no longer published)
Addenda were documents that changed (by correction, addition or deletion) the technical requirements of an ISO document; an addendum was subject to acceptance by ballot in accordance with the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1. (Addenda are included in this RFC because some of them are still valid.)

Supplements are numbered consecutively per ISO document, and within each type.

"supplnumber" identifies the number of the supplement.

"supplversion" designates the version of a published supplement. At present only two versions are used in practice: when a supplement is published it is a version 1. If that supplement is subsequently corrected by issuing a corrected version, as designated by the term "Corrected" on the cover page together with a date, the corrected version is version 2.

The language of a supplement can be different from that of the document. For example, a supplement may apply to only one of the languages of a bilingual document. For such cases, the language of a supplement can be identified using the "language" element defined above. The interpretation is the same, except that it applies only to the supplement.

docelement = clause / term

clause = ":clause:" clauseno / clauserange
*( "," clauseno / clauserange )
clauseno = ( ALPHA / DIGITS ) *( "." DIGITS )
clauserange = clauseno "-" clauseno

term = ":term:" termno / termrange
*( "," termno / termrange)
termno = ( ALPHA / DIGITS ) *( "." DIGITS )
termrange = termno "-" termno

"docelement" identifies one or more numbered subdivisions of a document. Types of numbered subdivision are specified in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2 [7]. This RFC currently specifies forms for reference to terms and clauses only. Revisions of this specification may define additional values.

"clause" represents the selection of one or more clauses or subclauses of the specification. The form "clauseno HYPHEN clauseno" designates a range of (sub)clauses and the form "clauseno COMMA clauseno" a list. A list can contain ranges.

"clauseno" designates one clause or subclause in a specification. When the first character of a "clauseno" is a digit, the reference is to the clause designated by that digit string, and to the subclause designated by any additional digit strings separated by periods. When the first character of a "clauseno" is alphabetical, the reference is to the corresponding Annex, and to the (sub)clauses designated by additional digit strings.

"term" represents the selection of one or more consecutive terms of the specification. The form "termno HYPHEN termno" designates a range of terms and the form "termno COMMA termno" a list. A list can contain ranges.

"termno" designates one term in a specification. When the first character of a "termno" is a digit, the reference is to the term designated by that digit string and by any additional digit strings separated by periods. When the first character of a "termno" is alphabetical, the reference is to the corresponding Annex, and to the terms designated by additional digit strings.

additions = techdefined / isodefined
techdefined = ":tech" *techelement
techelement = ; unspecified
isodefined = ; unspecified

"additions" are additional elements of the NSS intended to identify a representation of an ISO document, an extract from an ISO document, or some related information set, as a resource in its own right.

"techdefined" represents an associated or embedded resource defined by the committee that develops or maintains the identified document. All such "additions" begin with the keyword "tech", but the further syntax is defined by the committee.

"isodefined" represents associated or embedded resources defined by the ISO Central Secretariat. The definition of "additions" beginning with any symbol other than "tech" is reserved to the ISO Central Secretariat.

The syntax of these additions is not specified in this RFC. Specific syntax for these additions will be specified as needed by the ISO Central Secretariat, or by the individual Committee that has the responsibility for developing or maintaining the identified document. (See further discussion under Process for Identifier Resolution below.)

DIGITS = DIGIT *DIGIT
DIGIT = "0" / "1" / "2" / "3" / "4" / "5" / "6" /
"7" / "8" / "9"
ALPHA = "A" / "B" / "C" / "D" / "E" / "F" / "G" /
"H" / "I" / "J" / "K" / "L" / "M" / "N" /
"O" / "P" / "Q" / "R" / "S" / "T" / "U" /
"V" / "W" / "X" / "Y" / "Z"

Basics of the ABNF notation used :
? " " literals (terminal character strings);
terms not in quotes are non-terminals
? / alternatives
? [] indicates an optional rule
? () indicates a group of rules, used as a single
alternative or as a single repeating group
? * indicates that the following term or group can repeat
0 or more times
? + indicates that the following term or group can repeat
1 or more times
? ; comment

Examples:

* Language handling:

urn:iso:std:iso:9999:-1:ed-1:en
refers to the 1st edition of ISO 9999-1, in English

urn:iso:std:iso:9999:-1:ed-1:en-fr
refers to the 1st edition of ISO 9999-1, in English/French (bilingual document)

* Originators/document type:

urn:iso:std:iso-iec:tr:9999:-1:ed-1:en
refers to the 1st edition of ISO/IEC TR 9999-1, in English

* Status:

urn:iso:std:iso-iec:9075:-3:cancelled:ed-2:en
urn:iso:std:iso-iec:9075:-3:stage-95.99:ed-2:en
both refer to the cancelled 2nd edition of ISO/IEC 9075-3, in English

urn:iso:std:iso-iec:9075:-3:draft:ed-4:en
urn:iso:std:iso-iec:9075:-3:stage-30.60:ed-4:en
both refer to the draft 4th edition of ISO/IEC 9075-3, in English

urn:iso:std:iso:128:-20:en
urn:iso:std:iso:128:-20:stage-90.20:ed-1:en
both refer to the published (90.20 = under 2nd periodic review) 1st edition of ISO 128-20, in English

urn:iso:std:iso:128:-71:cancelled:ed-1:en
urn:iso:std:iso:128:-71:stage-30.98.v2:ed-1:en
both refer to the cancelled (30.98 = project deleted) 1st edition of ISO 128-71, in English; the second example refers specifically to the 2nd iteration (projectversion) at stage 30

* Non-numeric part number

urn:iso:std:iso:9999:-A02:ed-1:en
refers to the 1st edition of ISO 9999-A02, in English

* Reference to a resource related to all parts of a multipart document

urn:iso:std:iso:20022:tech:xsd:camt.001.001.01
refers to a "techdefined" resource (i.e. a resource defined by the committee that develops or maintains the identified document) associated with ISO 20022 in its entirety; in this example the techdefined part comprises ":xsd:camt.001.001.01"

NOTE At the time of drafting of this schema, ISO 20022 comprises 5 parts: parts 1 and 2 are International Standards; parts 3 to 5 are Technical Specifications. Therefore the "doctype" standard is used in the URN.

* Docversion handling:

urn:iso:std:iso:9999:-1:ed-1:v2:en
refers to the corrected English version of 1st edition of ISO 9999-1

urn:iso:std:iso:9999:-1:ed-1:v1-amd1:en
refers to the version comprising 1st edition of ISO 9999-1, incorporating the latest version of Amendment 1, in English

urn:iso:std:iso:9999:-1:ed-1:v1:en-fr:amd:1:v2:en
refers to the 2nd version of Amendment 1, in English, which amends the 1st version of edition 1 of ISO 9999-1, in English/French (bilingual document)

urn:iso:std:iso:9999:-1:ed-1:v1-amd1.v1:en-fr:amd:2:v2:en (isoversion scheme)
refers to the corrected version of Amendment 2, in English, which amends the document comprising the 1st version of edition 1 of ISO 9999-1 incorporating the 1st version of Amendment 1, in English/French (bilingual document)

urn:iso:std:iso:5817:ed-2:v2:en:cor:1:en
refers to the 1st version of Technical Corrigendum 1, in English, which amends the corrected version of edition 2 of ISO 5817, in English

* Supplement handling:

urn:iso:std:iso:9999:-1:ed-2:en:amd:1
refers to Amendment 1 to 2nd edition of ISO 9999-1, in English

urn:iso:std:iso:9999:-1:ed-2:en:amd:1:v2
refers to corrected version of Amendment 1 to 2nd edition of ISO 9999-1, in English

urn:iso:std:iso:9999:1:ed-2:en-fr:amd:2:en
refers to Amendment 2 in English to 2nd edition of ISO 9999-1, in English/French (bilingual document)

urn:iso:std:iso:9999:-1:ed-2:en:amd:1:cor:1
refers to Corrigendum 1 to Amendment 1 to 2nd edition of ISO 9999-1, in English

Relevant ancillary documentation:

ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1 [1] and Part 2 [7], and ISO supplement [2].

Identifier uniqueness considerations:

Assignment of URNs for documents in the requested namespace will be managed by the ISO Central Secretariat, which will ensure that the assigned URNs are consistent with the ISO Directives for unique identification of ISO documents.

Assignment of URNs for Technical Committee resources related to ISO documents will be managed by the Technical Committees developing or maintaining those documents. As indicated above, each such URN will extend the URN for the containing document via "additions". The responsibility of the Technical Committee will therefore be to ensure the uniqueness of the techdefined "addition" that constitutes the identifier for the resource within the document namespace, and thus the uniqueness of the overall resource identifier within the requested namespace.

Identifier persistence considerations:

Assigned URNs will not be reused and will remain valid beyond the lifecycle of the referenced resources. However, it should be noted that although the URNs remain valid, the status of the referenced resource may change.

Process for identifier resolution:

Resolving document identifiers:

This schema has been developed with the intent that a URN identifying an ISO document can be transformed to a valid http URI by replacing the requested URN namespace prefix ("iso") and the "std:" prefix with the domain name "standards.iso.org" and replacing all occurrences of ":" within the identifier with "/". (ISO is planning to develop a website implementation to support these URIs.)

Examples:

urn:iso:std:iso:9999:-1:ed-1:en: corresponds to:
http://standards.iso.org/iso/9999/-1/ed-1/en/

urn:iso:std:iso-iec:tr:9999:-1:ed-1:en: corresponds to:
http://standards.iso.org/iso-iec/tr/9999/-1/ed-1/en/

urn:iso:std:iso:9999:-1:ed-2:en-fr:amd:2: corresponds to:
http://standards.iso.org/iso/9999/-1/ed-2/en-fr/amd/2/

Resolving identifiers for "addition" resources:

For URNs in the requested namespace that refer to additional resources related to ISO documents, the ISO Central Secretariat will specify the resolution procedure at the time it defines the syntax for the corresponding "addition" to the NSS. In most cases, those resources will be maintained on an ISO website, as extensions to the HTTP URIs described above.

Rules for lexical equivalence:

URNs are lexically equivalent if and only if they are lexically identical.

The "case" of alphabetic characters in "part" elements is specified to be "upper case", in order to avoid ambiguity with other elements that may follow a docnumber, have similar representations, and begin with "lower case" alphabetics.

Conformance with URN Syntax:

No special considerations.

Validation mechanism:

None specified.

Scope:

Global.

3. Namespace Considerations

Requirements:

The ISO specific requirements are as follows:

- globally unique, persistent identifiers
- location-independent identifiers
- human-interpretable identifiers
- a scheme applicable to paper documents as well as machine-readable
documents
- a scheme applicable to conceptual documents and explicit forms of
documents
- a scheme applicable to resources extracted from documents
- a scheme applicable to "metadata" associated with documents
- a scheme in which the identifier assignment is managed by the ISO
Central Secretariat.

Location-independence: Because the publication of ISO standards is a complex arrangement involving multiple development organizations and national standards institutes, a given ISO document may be available in a number of forms from a number of sources. This makes it important to have a document identifier that is global in scope, widely and uniformly used, and independent of the text source used by any given reference.

Human-interpretable: Many, perhaps most, references to documents appear in text generated by human authors. It is important that an author familiar with the scheme be able to generate a correct URN for a document for which s/he has the ISO reference (or document identifier). Conversely, it is important that a reader unfamiliar with the scheme be able to identify the URN as a reference to an ISO document, particularly an ISO standard, and also to recognize identifiers for forms, languages, or metadata sets.

Paper documents: Older ISO standards that are commonly used as industrial references exist only in paper form or in earlier machine-readable forms that are not commonly used on the Internet. It is important to have a document identifier scheme that extends to these resources as well. (In fact, many of these have been converted to Internet forms, and others are being converted, but it is important that the identifier be independent of the form in which the document can be obtained at any given time.)

Conceptual documents vs. representation forms: Because ISO documents are regularly maintained and re-published in multiple forms, it is important to have document identifiers that denote the conceptual document, without regard to publication form. At the same time, it is necessary for certain types of use to be able to refer to specific editions, or specific publication forms (for example, editions in different languages, or to PDF or HTML versions).

Document extracts: ISO standards may contain formal specifications in machine-processable languages, or formal specifications that also have representations in machine-processable languages. It is useful to be able to extract these specifications in machine-processable form as separate resources, and therefore it is necessary to give these "extracted resources" global identifiers derived from the document identifier using a consistent identification scheme.

Document metadata: Certain uses of documents and document text, primarily bibiliographic, also extract information from the documents, and that information, commonly called "metadata", is organized in machine-readable forms conforming to other standards. These metadata sets then become resources in their own right. It is important to give them URN identifiers consistent with the document identification scheme.

Alternative naming schemes:

Before initiating this request, ISO attempted to find an existing or currently proposed URN NID scheme that might be used instead of a dedicated scheme. Two existing schemes were carefully considered, because they clearly meet part of the requirements:
- The OID scheme, documented in IETF RFC 3061 [9]
- The PublicId scheme, documented in IETF RFC 3151 [10]

The OID scheme is derived from the joint ISO/ITU-T ASN.1 object-identifier scheme specified in ISO/IEC 8824-1:2002 (original edition 1984, the RFC cites the 1988 CCITT edition of the encoding rules in ISO/IEC 8825). This standard assigned to ISO the registry authority for all identifiers in the { iso(1) } namespace, and therefore, ISO controls the registry of all identifiers beginning "oid:1:". And in fact, ISO has developed, and is using, an identification scheme under ASN.1 that meets most of the above requirements. ISO could clearly define a use of the OID scheme that would be adequate to meet all of its technical objectives, although it would further complicate the current ASN.1 scheme.

The original intent of ISO 8824 was to permit both a human-readable form for the identifier, to maximize intuitive recognition, and an encoding that minimized the number of bits needed to communicate an OID value over a network. Regrettably, the encoding chosen in RFC 3061 is much closer to the minimal bits encoding than to the human-readable one. The NSS for the OID scheme consists entirely of digits and punctuation. For example, the ASN.1 identifier
{ iso(1) standard(0) 7852 part(2) edition(3) }
becomes: urn:oid:1:0:7852:2:3.

This is difficult for a human reader or author to interpret. It is also easy to mistype, and the scheme contains no "check-digits", which makes it difficult to validate, leading to the propagation of URNS that are invalid or valid but erroneous. Finally, the all-numeric form conveys no hint of the name of the responsible organization and therefore no hint of any URL that might aid a human reader in interpreting the reference. The OID scheme makes all of the required identifiers technically possible and technically useable by software, but for all practical purposes, the OID URNs are useful only to software.

The PublicId scheme is derived from SGML (ISO 8879:1986 and ISO 9070:1991) bibliographic catalogue forms. Narrowed to ISO publications, it is adequate for the unique global persistent identification of published documents, in both paper and machine-processable form. Importantly, the PublicId scheme does not have a "conceptual document" notion -- it identifies specific publications and editions. "Weak identification" could be used to implement the conceptual document concept, but the PublicId scheme does not document that interpretation. And in any case, the PublicId scheme does not extend to draft documents, which are often referenced in pilot implementations, to separate forms of a document, or to resources extracted from documents. It supports only those metadata elements that are defined in SGML. The scheme could be extended to do most of these, but the ISO-specific extensions would not in general extend to the much broader base of documents identified by PublicIds. (Version and edition management practices vary significantly across publishers, depending on their milieu.) Further, ISO Central Secretariat could not and should not control the registry of such URNs.

ISO therefore concluded that the alternative schemes are not adequate to meet the requirements of the ISO community.

Whilst requesting a new namespace for ISO documents and their derivatives, ISO does not wish to discourage the use of these other identifiers for ISO publications. The PublicId form, in particular, is useful for referring to ISO publications in a larger bibliographic information space.

4. Community Considerations

The ISO community is broad in two dimensions. In one dimension, its documents are developed and used in a large variety of industries and professions: natural sciences, manufacturing, construction, transportation, information technology, social sciences, etc. In the other dimension, it is a community of expert developers, standards managers, publishers, professional users and consumers. And Internet information technologies are a part of common professional practice in all of these areas in both dimensions.

ISO standards are cited in business agreements, in professional publications, in product descriptions, and in standards development and publication activities. When these citations appear in electronic form, the references must be unambiguous.

The information technology community is itself very active in the development and use of standards, and many ISO publications are developed by and for that community. When an Internet information exchange uses a form specified in an ISO document, or a terminology defined in an ISO document, it is often necessary to identify that ISO specification in the envelope surrounding the exchange. That identification should use a formal unambiguous identifier in a form readily recognized by the receiving software, and possibly by the ultimate human recipient of the information.

In order to facilitate the use of existing and emerging Internet technologies for all of these purposes, URNs conforming to IETF RFC 2141 represent the most useful form of formal globally unambiguous identifier. The use of a managed namespace for such identifiers, following a consistent scheme for identifying ISO documents and their derivatives would be of significant benefit to the entire ISO community.

It would give professional users in many industries a standard form for electronic reference to ISO standards in HTML, XML, PDF, etc., documents.

It would give software developers a standard form for reference to ISO standard protocols, schemata, languages, data sets, etc.

It would give standards developers a standard form for reference to other ISO publications in various stages of development. And it would give them a standard form for creating identifiers for machine-readable information sets contained in, or derived from, the specifications.

It would give standards managers and publishers a formal uniform scheme for reference to specific publications, editions and versions of ISO documents.

While the assignment of identifiers under this scheme is managed by the ISO Central Secretariat, the processes by which the identified objects arise and acquire such identifiers are the result of agreements made by the member bodies. Every such project is initiated by one member body and reviewed and voted on by the others. Every accepted project is open to participation by any member body, and in fact, participation by a certain minimum number (usually 5) of member bodies is required for acceptance of most projects. In general, the member bodies are open professional and industrial organizations reflecting broad expertise and national interest.

It should be noted that ISO documents in draft state are not usually made available outside the ISO standards development community. Making them available to professionals outside of the process might well mislead the recipients into premature adoption of practices that are not yet completely specified or have not yet achieved consensus, and therefore may well change.

It should also be noted that ISO documents are not, in general, freely available over the Internet. Rather there are complex agreements between ISO and its member institutes as to the rights to the publications and the corresponding fees that may be charged for paper or electronic copies of various editions. Some ISO documents are freely available, and some are freely available in certain forms. In general, derivatives of ISO documents (schemata, metadata sets, etc.) are freely available over the Internet in the appropriate machine-readable forms. A URL associated with a URN in the requested namespace may therefore lead directly to a machine-readable copy of the text of the document or derivative, or it may lead to a site that can provide that text for a fee, or it may lead to a site that can only sell a paper copy of the document. Bearing in mind that ISO is a network of otherwise independent institutes, this behaviour is simply a property of the ISO community.

Finally, it should be noted that, for many purposes, reference to the ISO standard is what is required, and only the product engineer or software tool builder actually needs access to the text. This request is based on the need to standardize the form of reference, not the means of access.

5. IANA Considerations

(responsibility of the IANA registry)

6. Security Considerations

The ISO URN Namespace ID shares the security considerations outlined
in RFC 3406 [8], but has no other known security considerations.

7. References

7.1. Normative References

[1] ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1, "Procedures for the technical work",
5th edition, International Organization for Standardization,
Geneva, 2004.

[2] ISO/IEC Directives, Supplement, "Procedures specific to
ISO", International Organization for Standardization,
Geneva.

[3] Moats, R., "URN Syntax", RFC 2141, May 1997.

[4] Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
Specifications: ABNF", RFC 2234, November 1997.

[5] ISO Guide 69:1999, Harmonized Stage Code system (Edition 2) -
Principles and guidelines for use.

[6] ISO 639-1, Codes for the representation of names of languages ?
Part 1: Alpha-2 code.

[7] ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2, "Rules for the structure and
drafting of International Standards", 5th edition, International
Organization for Standardization, Geneva, 2004.

[8] Daigle, L., van Gulik, D., Iannella, R. and P. Faltstrom,
"Uniform Resource Names (URN) Namespace Definition Mechanisms",
BCP 66, RFC 3406, October 2002.

7.2. Informative References

[9] Mealling, M., "A URN Namespace of Object Identifiers",
IETF RFC 3061, February 2001.

[10] Walsh, N., Cowan, J., and Grosso, P., "A URN Namespace for
Public Identifiers", IETF RFC 3151, August 2001

8. Author's Address

J. Goodwin
Manager, Production Services, Standards Department
International Organization for Standardization
Case Postale 56
CH-1211 Genève 20
Switzerland

EMail: goodwin at iso.org

9. Full Copyright Statement

(IETF responsibility)

RFC nnnn URN Namespace for ISO February 2006

J. Goodwin Informational [Page 2]

Prev by Date: URN Namespace for GEANT - Internet - Draft
Next by Date: RE: Submission draft-goodwin-iso-urn-00.txt -- application for a formal NID
Previous by thread: URN Namespace for GEANT - Internet - Draft
Next by thread: RE: Submission draft-goodwin-iso-urn-00.txt -- application for a formal NID
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread