- From: Williams, Stuart <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 17:49:49 +0100
- To: "'Tim Bray'" <tbray@textuality.com>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org
Hi Tim, > -----Original Message----- > From: Tim Bray [mailto:tbray@textuality.com] > Sent: 02 July 2002 17:31 > To: www-tag@w3.org > Subject: Re: TB16 Re: Comments on arch doc draft > > Joshua Allen wrote: > > This seems fine to me. But for God's sake let's make sure any guidance > > on this makes it very clear that this is a namespace *name*, and > > although it may function as a stand-in for the namespace URI, it is > > *not* the URI. > > I can find no distinction in any normative prose anywhere between > "namespace name" and "namespace URI". -Tim > Not sure if [1] helps... Dare pointed the document out a couple of days ago [2]. The Q&A seems to make a subtle distinction between "namespace name" and "namespace uri" to cover cases where relative URI's are being used to name namespaces. But I have no idea where this stands with respect to being normative. Cheers, Stuart -- [1] http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xppa#47785312 [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2002Jul/0001.html
Received on Tuesday, 2 July 2002 12:50:03 UTC