W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-zig@w3.org > March 2003

RE: requesting XML records

From: Matthew Dovey <matthew.dovey@las.ox.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 22:01:20 -0000
Message-ID: <149B1E6A2147804D9651886835D1999A2007C1@sers004.ouls.ox.ac.uk>
To: "Ray Denenberg" <rden@loc.gov>, "zig" <www-zig@w3.org>

Note that there is the term IRI now around in namespace-land to
distinguish between a URI based identifier as opposed to a actionable
URI (which is really a URL - ie a locational "thing").

Matthew

> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ray Denenberg [mailto:rden@loc.gov] 
> Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 9:50 PM
> To: zig
> 
> 
> "Dietz,Dana" wrote:
> 
> > Bath version 2 says we'll ask for syntax XML and ESN 
> > http://www.nlc-bnc.ca/bath/tp-dc-dtd.htm (they've got the 
> DTD posted 
> > at this URL so a parser can look there to validate).  So isn't the 
> > problem already solved?
> 
> That'll work for now, in the short term.
> 
> Issues with using an actionable URI (the url where the schema 
> is located) are persistence, uniqueness, and ambiguity:  Can 
> you guarantee the URI  will (1) stay there, (2) be the 
> official identifier for that schema (even though  the schema 
> may be replicated elsewhere), and (2) remain unchanged.
> 
> If you try to go to:
> http://www.loc.gov/zing/srw/dcschema/v1.0/  you'll get "Not 
> Found" because it's not intended as an actionable uri but as 
> an identifier, the same way that an oid is an identifier. We 
> *can* guarantee persistence of this uri, as well as 
> un-ambiguity.  If a new version is developed, there will be a 
> new uri, maybe http://www.loc.gov/zing/srw/dcschema/v1.1/, 
> but the old uri
> (http://www.loc.gov/zing/srw/dcschema/v1.0/) will continue to 
> identify version 1.0.
> 
> --Ray
> 
> 
> 
Received on Tuesday, 25 March 2003 17:01:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 29 October 2009 06:12:23 GMT