In the first paragraph of section 2 of the draft W3C TAG finding URNs, Namespaces, and Registries, four references (besides XRI) are cited to explain the motivations for the finding. This page explains the relevance of these four references to the requirements for abstract identifiers that motivated the OASIS XRI Technical Committee.
It should be noted that all these references are clearly relevant to Issue 50 as defined by the TAG. The definition of this issue is:
This issue covers a) URIs for namespace names b) URNs for location independent names c) XML registries, and perhaps centralized vs. decentralized vocabulary tracking.
Of these issues, however, only (b) is relevant to XRI, and location-independent naming is only one of many XRI requirements.
A Uniform Resource Name (URN) Formal Namespace for the New Zealand Government
- Relationship to XRI requirements: Almost none - the scope of this document is limited to defining a URN NID (namespace identifier) registration for the New Zealand government.
RFC 3688: The IETF XML Registry
- Relationship to XRI requirements: Almost none - the scope of this document is limited to a URN NID declaration for the IETF for XML-related artifacts in IETF specifications.
Universal Business Language (UBL) Naming and Design Rules
- Relationship to XRI requirements: None - this document only discusses conventions for the use of URNs in UBL documents.
The "info" URI Scheme for Information Assets with Identifiers in Public Namespaces
- Relationship to XRI requirements: Almost none - the only relationship is the definition of a URI scheme to bring groups of information assets currently outside the URI space into the URI space. It does not involved abstract identifiers, persistent identifiers (explicitly out of scope), structured identifiers, or uniform discovery.