W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-talk@w3.org > November to December 2001

RE: What is at the end of the namespace?

From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 15:57:28 +0200
Message-ID: <2BF0AD29BC31FE46B7887732114404316217ED@trebe003.NOE.Nokia.com>
To: ldodds@ingenta.com, fielding@eBuilt.com, a.powell@ukoln.ac.uk
Cc: www-talk@w3.org, uri@w3.org


> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Leigh Dodds [mailto:ldodds@ingenta.com]
> Sent: 16 November, 2001 12:38
> To: Stickler Patrick (NRC/Tampere); fielding@eBuilt.com;
> a.powell@ukoln.ac.uk
> Cc: www-talk@w3.org; uri@w3.org
> Subject: RE: What is at the end of the namespace?
> 
> 
> > That's like saying that, because a 'mailto:' URI is a URI and
> > URI's can identify anything, I can use a 'mailto:' URI to 
> > denote an abstract concept and software should *know* that
> > it means the abstract concept and not a way to send some
> > content to a particular mailbox.
> 
> Won't its meaning be implied by the context of its usage?

Yeah, right, like the context of namespace URI implies the
opaque identifier of a global naming partition, not something
to be dereferenced...

If what you suggest is true, then we can toss out all URI
prefixes such as http: mailto: ftp: etc. because, after
all, their meaning will be implied by context, eh? I.e.
intead of having 

   ftp://foo.abc.com
   http:/foo.abc.com

I can just use

   uri://foo.abc.com

and whether I need HTTP or FTP access will be clear from context, eh?

Sorry. Nope.

;-)

Patrick
Received on Friday, 16 November 2001 08:57:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 27 October 2010 18:14:27 GMT