Re: [Fwd: xmlns, uri+name pairs or just uris..? Clarification n eeded.]

At 03:33 PM 7/31/00 -0700, Perry A. Caro wrote:
>Graham Klyne wrote:
>
> > > > It seems to me that the requirement to find the
> > > > namespace-related
> > > > portion of a URI in isolation is not reasonable.
>
>Agreed.
>
> > > > It's also
> > > > not clear to me
> > > > what purpose it serves.
>
>One purpose would be reserialization of the model.  Doesn't anyone else need
>to do this?  We do.  Our processors are essentially filters: import RDF,
>modify it, export RDF, pass it down the chain.
>
>Of course, our system doesn't concatanate the URI, so recovering the
>namespace is not an issue.

Oh yes, I agree that's an important goal.

But does that goal need to be achieved on URIs in isolation?  (Your own 
solution effectively maintains additional contextual information).

#g

------------
Graham Klyne
(GK@ACM.ORG)