Re: [xml-dev] [XQuery] Re: [xml-dev] draft-rsalz-qname-urn

I've forwarded this to our Working Groups for discussion. We're not 
likely to discuss it before at least some time in January. Watch this space.

Jonathan

Elliotte Harold wrote:
> Michael Kay wrote:
> 
>> The XQuery specification, incidentally, defines a mapping of error 
>> QNames to
>> error URIs. It's different from this one, of course.
> 
> 
> The error URIs in the XQuery spec look like this:
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2004/10/xqt-errors#XPST0017
> 
> Something similar has been tried before in XML digital signatures and 
> RDF. For reasons elucidated in the draft proposal, this format is not 
> suitable for all QNames and does not work as a generic mechanism for 
> encoding Qnames as URIs.
> 
> The XQuery format also seem to suffer from the disease that everything 
> must be an http URI even when, as in this case, the URI is not actually 
> resolvable. (http://www.w3.org/2004/10/xqt-errors is a real page but the 
> fragment ID doesn't point to anything.)
> 
> I agree with most of your concerns about the details of the proposed 
> qname URN scheme (IRIs vs. URIs, percent encoding, etc.) but at a 
> fundamental level I think the proposed scheme is better than what XQuery 
> is proposing. I would suggest that XQuery adopt the new qname URN scheme 
> rather than using http URIs to identify error codes. In fact, I'll cc 
> this to the XQuery working group to register it as a formal comment.
>

Received on Thursday, 16 December 2004 16:13:17 UTC