Re: Common Sense! Was: Re: The 'resource' identified by a namespace name URI should be the namespace

> Therefore, you can write a spec which says "this spec is the definition
> and the only definoition of the namespcace X" and you can by definition
> be correct by definition.

You can write such a document but it would be incorrect.

Whatever definition you choose to make about the namespace with
name mailto:timbl@w3.org then it is still true that that namespace
contains a name with local part "DavidCarlisleWasHere"

That name might not occur in any language you choose to define by
schema, but it is still in there poluting your namespace (and everyone
else's)

This isn't just a philosophical point it has practical effect

the document

<DavidCarlisleWasHere xmlns="mailto:timbl@w3.org"/>

is a conforming document and the local name and namespace name will be
reported as my name and your mailbox URI by any namespace aware
system.

Namespaces don't have structure, so there is nothing you can define
about them.

If you defined a language via a schema or dtd then (unless you were
feeling strange) this document would not validate against that schema
or dtd, but schemas are not at all the same thing as namespaces,
and schema validators are not at all the same thing as namespace
parsers.

David

Received on Tuesday, 6 June 2000 16:04:23 UTC