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

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

From: Williams, Stuart <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 16:29:54 +0100
Message-ID: <5E13A1874524D411A876006008CD059F04A07485@0-mail-1.hpl.hp.com>
To: "'Norman Walsh'" <Norman.Walsh@sun.com>
Cc: www-tag@w3.org

Hi Norm,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Norman Walsh [mailto:Norman.Walsh@sun.com]
> Sent: 11 April 2003 16:28
> To: www-tag@w3.org
> Subject: Re: namespaceDocument-8: possible interaction with Namespaces
> in XML 1.1
> 
> / Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> was heard to say:
> | Yes and yes, but I believe this might be difficult to achieve.  The
> | TAG seems to be quite broadly unenthusiastic about URNs but they have
> | enthusiastic partisans in the community.
> 
> Yeah. And on the TAG, too, even if in distinct minority :-)

Just to stand up and be counted as one who does not have a negative
pre-disposition to the use of URNs.

Personnally, I would like our arch document to be as general as possible wrt
to URI, and only specific wrt to a particular scheme if absolutely
necessary.

> |> Q2: Your text "URNs are not effectively usable" might lead me to
believe
> |> that there might be an effort ongoing to standardize how to retrieve
> |> resources using URNs.  Do you know of such an effort?
> |
> | Yes, there are such efforts in the IETF; the acronym doesn't spring to
> | mind, but that doesn't matter, because I'm sure that several other
> | people will spring forward to explain why URNs are in fact retrievable
> | and that TimBL and I are blowing smoke when we claim they're not.  I
> | accept that mechanisms in principle exist to dereference URNs, it's
> | just that I've never used a computer where such software was
> | installed, so it's clearly far from ubiquitous.
> 
> Others have made those points, so I won't. There's also "OASIS
> Extensible Resource Identifier (XRI) TC"[1] but I haven't looked at
> it.
> 
> It will come as no surprise to Tim that I second Larry's observation:
> 
>   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.

+1 too....

> 
>                                         Be seeing you,
>                                           norm
> 
> [1] http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/xri/

Regards

Stuart
--
Received on Monday, 14 April 2003 11:30:14 GMT

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