- From: Joshua Allen <joshuaa@microsoft.com>
- Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 11:35:01 -0700
- To: "Tim Bray" <tbray@textuality.com>, <www-tag@w3.org>
> That's a realy terrible example. Those office URNs are a disaster, and > I suspect that Microsoft did this partly to avoid documenting their Not to get all defensive, but ... :-) Personally, I always supported the office-style URNs, because there is absolutely no confusion about whether or not the URN identifies a web page (it obviously doesn't). I also thought it was reckless and irresponsible for people to overload http: URLs to refer to both a web page and a namespace. Or to put it another way, there were plenty of people who thought that the urn: scheme was the most appropriate way to name namespaces without sabotaging the value of URLs. BUT, taking religious positions is a waste of time, and IMO it is way past time for W3C to solve the whole debate by fiat. So I welcome the declaration "all namespace names SHOULD use easily-dereferenced URLs."
Received on Tuesday, 2 July 2002 14:35:33 UTC