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

RE: Significant W3C Confusion over Namespace Meaning and Policy

From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 12:27:24 -0800
Message-ID: <32D5845A745BFB429CBDBADA57CD41AF0DBCCCAF@ussjex01.amer.bea.com>
To: "Norman Walsh" <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>, <www-tag@w3.org>

I've been thinking about the relationship of namespaces to version
identifiers for a while.  Perhaps the version attribute could be
relative and then appended to the ns uri, ie ns#version=5 or
ns#version/5 or ns/version/5?

Cheers,
Dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-tag-request@w3.org [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of
> Norman Walsh
> Sent: Friday, February 18, 2005 7:22 AM
> To: www-tag@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Significant W3C Confusion over Namespace Meaning and
Policy
> 
> / Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com> was heard to say:
> [...]
> | What counts is that it is clear which version of which
> | model must be used to interpret the data, and ideally,
> | each version of each model would be identified by a
> | distinct URI which is communicated to the recieving
> | agent and via which, information specifically about
> | that particular version of that particular model could
> | be obtained.
> 
> I'm hoping that the combination of namespace name and version will be
> sufficient. Making the version a URI might be a good idea though,
> since DocBook can be extended by others. (Without changing the
> namespace!? Yep. Such has it always been with DocBook.)
> 
>                                         Be seeing you,
>                                           norm
> 
> --
> Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM / XML Standards Architect / Sun Microsystems,
Inc.
> NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended
> recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information.
> Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is
prohibited.
> If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by
> reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.
Received on Friday, 18 February 2005 20:27:29 GMT

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