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

Re: The lost meaning of the HTTP protocol in URIs

From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 00:00:18 +0200
To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Cc: www-tag@w3.org
Message-ID: <3f8bc855.1587728813@smtp.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>

* Sandro Hawke wrote:
>> >> > http://www.w3.org/1999/xslt
>> >> http://www.w3.org/1999/XSLT/Transform
>> > http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform
>> 
>> And now let's try to type the RDF Namespace URI Reference...
>
>What would you like it to do?

I just wonder why W3C has no Namespace URI Reference policy that ensures
that these are easy to remember and easy to use by the community. Some
contain a reference to a year which is sometimes the year of publication
of the first draft, the latest draft, the recommendation, sometimes they
contain a month, sometimes they do not, sometimes a day, some have
version numbers, some have dashes, some use all-lowercase, some use
all-uppercase, some use mixed or camel case, some have a trailing slash,
some have a trailing hash, some technologies use different namespaces
for different versions, some use the same, ...

I neither understand why P3P is at /P3P/, RDF at /RDF/, PICS at /PICS/
QA at /QA/, WAI at /WAI/ but TAG at /2001/tag/ on the W3C web site, just
as if anyone cared that the TAG had been formed in 2001; W3C URI design
seems more and more stupid.
Received on Wednesday, 17 September 2003 18:00:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:20 GMT