W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > February 2005

RE: Significant W3C Confusion over Namespace Meaning and Policy

From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) <len.bullard@intergraph.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 10:47:50 -0600
Message-ID: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE07206C22@hq1.pcmail.ingr.com>
To: 'Norman Walsh' <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>, "'www-tag@w3.org'" <www-tag@w3.org>

I agree, Norm, but as a practical matter, there is nothing 
preventing the use of the URI to identify a document that 
explains that policy.

len

From: www-tag-request@w3.org [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of
Norman Walsh

In the general case, I simply do not believe that there is any
relationship between the namespace name and the set of terms in the
namespace.

Consider the case of DocBook. DocBook V5.0 will be in a namespace. I
do not expect that namespace to change. Ever. It will be the namespace
for V5.0, V5.1, V6.0, ... V17.3, etc. ad nauseum, of DocBook.

If the document you have in hand validates against the DocBook V5.3
schema, it is a DocBook V5.3 document. If it validates (instead of, or
also) against the V5.0 schema, it is a DocBook V5.0 document. Turning
that around, as a consequence of the versioning policy of the DocBook
Technical Committee, I can predict that every V5.0 document will also
be V5.3 document.

This is not the only possible namespace/versioning strategy, but for a
bunch of practical reasons, it is the best policy for DocBook and I'd
resist any attempt to define a general policy for namespace/versioning
that prevented the DocBook policy.
Received on Thursday, 17 February 2005 16:48:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:32 GMT