Proposal for short namespace URIs for W3C TRs [Was: XBL Namespace uses the data: scheme

> DanC wrote:
> 
> I still have my reservations, but I'm getting the impression that this 
> policy is going to change soonish.
> We're currently considering
> 	http://www.w3.org/ns/foo
> e.g.
> 	http://www.w3.org/ns/xbl
> 
> If the random years issue is the main concern, I suppose that should 
> suffice.
> 
> The system administration cost of changing the domain name part 
> (http://ns.w3.org/foo or http://w3.org/ns/foo or http://w3.org/foo ) 
> seems high; changing that looks like more trouble than it's worth.
> 
> Issuing yearless URIs to replace existing namespace names also seems 
> like more trouble than it's worth, to me, but who knows... the future 
> is longer than the past, and if people are willing to do all the hard 
> work to work out a transition plan and get it reviewed using normal W3C 
> process (last call, CR, etc.), perhaps that's not a bad thing.

Hi all,

There was Team discussion and support today for this amendment to
http://www.w3.org/2005/07/13-nsuri:

 1) Namespace URIs in W3C Technical Reports may have the
    following syntax (using xhtml2 as an example):
     http://www.w3.org/ns/xhtml2

    (It is not yet clear that that is the preferred syntax.)

 2) Director approval is required for a namespace URI with
    the new syntax.

 3) We should avoid confusion when using a given shortname 
    in both /TR/ and /ns/ spaces.

I would be interested in hearing whether there is support in
this forum.

 _ Ian





-- 
Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel:                     +1 718 260-9447