Re: namespace URI and related

Thierry,

Thanks for circulating that pointer, for WG reference next week.

Yes, I was aware of those NS policies.  That's one reason I brought it up 
-- we should be clear about it ourselves, before someone else brings it up 
at an awkward time, later in our processing.

This is something of an unusual case, and how does the policy 
apply?  Unusual:  the specification will be a standard in two different 
organizations, with two different conventions.  Obviously we don't want a 
W3C flavor of the standard and an OASIS flavor.

So that leaves some possibilities:  go with one flavor, to the exclusion of 
the other; or, allow both conventions; or ... (?)

I suspect that we will fall under the second bullet of #2 below.  We ought 
to decide next week what we think is an optimal solution.

-Lofton.

At 08:51 PM 8/16/2006 +0200, Thierry MICHEL wrote:

>Lofton,
>
>W3C policy is set in the following document "URIs for W3C Namespaces". 
>This should help to resolve your issue.
>http://www.w3.org/2005/07/13-nsuri
>
>
>
>1- Director approval of a namespace URI is NOT REQUIRED when the URI has 
>the form http://www.w3.org/YYYY/MM/ssss.
>
>2- Director approval is REQUIRED for all other namespace URIs. In particular:
>     * For specifications that are likely to be widely used, the Director 
> MAY authorize a (shorter) namespace URI of the form 
> http://www.w3.org/YYYY/ssss.
>     * The Director MAY authorize a group to use a namespace URI that does 
> not begin with http://www.w3.org/. The Director expects the organization 
> that allocates the URI to have a clear persistence policy associated with 
> the URI, to make a commitment to longevity of service, and to provide 
> information about how the URI will be maintained in the event of the 
> demise of the host organization.
>
>TM.
>
>  Henderson wrote:
>>All,
>>I have noticed a spec detail that we should have a look at next week, and 
>>confirm or adjust.  Have a look here [1],
>>[1] 
>>http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-webcgm20-20060623/WebCGM20-XCF.html#namespace
>>The namespace URI (and its simple de-reference document), DTD location, 
>>etc, certainly work for WebCGM implementations (as current 
>>implementations prove).  But we should confirm (or adjust):  is it the 
>>appropriate formulation for a "joint" standard such the collaborative 
>>OASIS-W3C WebCGM?
>>-Lofton.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>--
>Thierry Michel
>W3C
>

Received on Wednesday, 16 August 2006 19:42:52 UTC