- From: Leigh Dodds <leigh@ldodds.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2006 10:38:31 +0000
- To: Jonathan Borden <jonathan@openhealth.org>
- CC: Elliotte Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>, www-tag@w3.org, XML Developers List <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
Jonathan Borden wrote: > What I *don't* want to say is that <http://example.org/foo.xsd> is a > member of the XML Schema namespace. Using > <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema> as the URI for the nature of "XML > Schema" creates this ambiguity for ***software agents***. I understand > that you, Elliotte, being an intelligent human being can distinguish > this contextual difference, but the type of logic that you are using to > do this is actually rather complicated. This is admittedly a technical > issue, but as far as I can see a real one. And doesn't a sofware agent have enough context to disambiguate this usage, i.e that a xlink:role on a rddl:resource indicates that the associated resource has a type of http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema? In other words, shouldn't the agent conform to the spec? Using the namespace uri as the nature of the resource is a handy as it avoids any prior co-ordination to agree on the URIs. Otherwise the RDDL spec will need to assign well-known URIs, or community will have to agree on its URIs; both of which seem to offer opportunities for "URI aliasing" which will surely cause *greater* confusion for software agents. Cheers, L. -- Home: http://www.ldodds.com | "Simplicity is the ultimate Blog: http://www.ldodds.com/blog | sophistication" -- Leonardo da Vinci
Received on Monday, 11 December 2006 10:38:48 UTC