Collect Proposed wordings (Was: Can everyone be happy?)

> This is a typical misuse of terminology by the few left on this list
> who do not understand the model in the URI specification.
> If a "namespace name" does not "identify" a namespace then
> how are these words being used?  Is a namespace nothing,
> because it is abstract?  Is there a complete inability here to
comprehend
> something whcih is not a string of characaters?

I think it should be noted, that the examples that David has put forward
are not solved at all by fixed base. He wants to be able to say that
http://WWW.W3.ORG is semantically different from http://www.w3.org even
though this breaks in a number of ways and falls in the category of "don't
do that". In fact, he has pointed out that he would prefer java class
names instead.

I would propose that if David is really serious about these thoughts then
he comes up with a proposal for how to change the namespace spec to not
use URIs but to use Java names. Having two discussions interleaved doesn't
lead to any progress.

> >The only two people I've seen speak against this with any real
> >conviction are Dan Connolly and Tim Berners-Lee.

I think there has been plenty of support for URIs but it is clear that
there are more discussions than just the binary question of URIs or not
URIs - the question of what to put instead among the non-URI group is
really quite open ranging from using a subset of URIs in a variety of ways
to completely change syntax.

Also, I don't think that some people who don't like the current NS spec
wording have been at all clear on how they anticipate the problems of
living in a decentralized, distributed environment is going to go away.
Just coming up with names isn't hard - coming up with useful names that
allow for decentralized extensibility is.

In order to make progress, I think it would be useful to collect *exact
proposals* for clarification/redesign/rewording of the current NS spec and
put them on a Web page (which of course would require using a URI but that
is another story). I for one am looking forward to see David's proposal on
java classes. Maybe W3C would be willing to put up such a page?

Henrik

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-uri/2000Jun/0699.html
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-uri/2000Jun/0699.html

Received on Thursday, 22 June 2000 12:18:40 UTC