W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > July to September 1999

RE: XML Namespaces vs. RDF

From: HOLLANDER,DAVE (HP-FtCollins,ex1) <dave_hollander@am.exch.hp.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 1999 09:27:43 -0600
Message-ID: <56D553C0B61BD311AD2300A0C9F485C236C54F@xfc02.fc.hp.com>
To: "'caro@Adobe.COM'" <caro@Adobe.COM>, rdf-dev@mailbase.ac.uk, www-rdf-comments@w3.org
Cc: xml-names-editor@w3.org
Hello,

I fail to see the conflict.  

On Tuesday, July 20, 1999 Perry writes:
> It's this business about concatanating that worries me.  The XML namespace
> spec never mentions concatanation as a valid mechanism.  Indeed, the
> non-normative appendices seem to imply that the expansion of 
> qualified names should be treated as ordered pairs.
> 
How we consider the expansion for definition is much different than
algorithms
for processing. There is no limitation on how the namespace information is
to
be processed.

> ...
> Which is right?  Am I reading too much into Appendix A.3?  

Yes.

> Is the
> concatanation mechanism suggested by RDF (and WebDAV, for that matter), a
> deviation from the XML namespace spec?

No, not only is A3 non-normative, it does not describe processing.

The only issue that I see is the fact that concatenation loses information,
as
your example shows. I this case the loss of the identity of the parts that
made
up the URI.  This does not seem to be a problem since the purpose is to
identify
a web object, but I leave that to the experts in the RDF to decide.


Dave Hollander
Co-chair, XML Schema Working Group
----------------------------------------------------------------------
email    - mailto:w3c-xml-schema-wg@w3.org
archive  - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-wg/
homepage - http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Schemas.html
Working Drafts - http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/ 
http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Received on Wednesday, 21 July 1999 11:28:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:27 GMT