W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlschema-dev@w3.org > January 2010

Re: url versus urn for namespace uri?

From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 10:23:05 +0000
To: "Michael Kay" <mike@saxonica.com>
Cc: "'Rusty Wright'" <rwright.lists@gmail.com>, <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
Message-ID: <f5baawbogom.fsf@calexico.inf.ed.ac.uk>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Some of the reasoning behind the W3C recommendation that you should
not only use an http: URI to identify your namespaces, but that you
also document your namespace at that URI (the policy which Michale Kay
disagress with) can be found at

  http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#namespace-document

A more extended discussion of the value for the Web of including in
such a document machine-readable information such as provided by RDDL
or GRDDL, see also

  http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/selfDescribingDocuments

ht
- -- 
       Henry S. Thompson, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh
                         Half-time member of W3C Team
      10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
                Fax: (44) 131 651-1426, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
                       URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFLVDaJkjnJixAXWBoRAgQ4AJ0VbjZc9Ngm2hjOO+KiM0timzVq3ACfdp7h
A5c0mAspGJJ/s4D1jgKwtgs=
=+f4P
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Monday, 18 January 2010 10:23:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 11 January 2011 00:15:16 GMT