W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > April 2003

RE: namespaceDocument-8: possible interaction with Namespaces in XML 1.1

From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 10:04:41 +0300
Message-ID: <A03E60B17132A84F9B4BB5EEDE57957B5FBB7E@trebe006.europe.nokia.com>
To: <GK@ninebynine.org>, <tbray@textuality.com>, <LMM@acm.org>
Cc: <www-tag@w3.org>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Graham Klyne [mailto:GK@ninebynine.org]
> Sent: 09 April, 2003 22:21
> To: Tim Bray; Larry Masinter
> Cc: www-tag@w3.org
> Subject: Re: namespaceDocument-8: possible interaction with Namespaces
> in XML 1.1
> 
> 
> 
> At 10:38 09/04/2003 -0700, Tim Bray wrote:
> >Larry Masinter wrote:
> >>In the long run, I think it's easier to make a URNs retrievable
> >>than it is to make HTTP URLs permanent, and that the W3C should
> >>stop trying to make an anti-URN policy.
> >
> >Why is that?  It seems to me that the "permanence" of a URI 
> has two facets:
> >
> >1. a community of people agree on what it means, e.g. a namespace
> >    name for XHTML
> >2. a publisher commits to provide representations of it
> >
> >Nothing in heaven and earth can ensure the permanence of #2. 
>  And I don't 
> >see that #1 has anything to do with whether the URI is a URN.
> 
> I think neither of the above are reasons to favour URNs over 
> some other form.
> 
> Reasons I do perceive are:
> 
> (1) A urn, by its form, declares an *intent* to be 
> (relatively) permanent 
> that is not indicated by most URLs, and
> 
> (2) A registered URN namespace carries with it an indication 
> of some level 
> of community consent regarding its assignment and purpose.
> 
> (3) For some groups, persistent management of web serving 
> infrastructure is 
> difficult to achieve.  In my experience, commercial 
> organizations tend to 
> regard their URL space as property of the marketing department, to be 
> rearranged and reorganized at whim, along with the 
> pantone-colour-of-the-day.  And if not them, the IT 
> department whose main 
> clout comes from serving the marketing arm of the 
> organiozation.  Future 
> product design may not get much attention here.  We here may 
> all agree 
> about "cool URIs", but it's often difficult to get management 
> buy-in to 
> such a non-bottom-line concept.  URNs provide another way.
> 
> I note that none of these are technical reasons, but I don't 
> think that 
> makes them less legitimate.
> 
> #g

+1

Well said, Graham.

Patrick


--
Patrick Stickler, Nokia/Finland, (+358 40) 801 9690, patrick.stickler@nokia.com
 
Received on Thursday, 10 April 2003 03:11:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:17 GMT