- From: John Boyer <JBoyer@PureEdge.com>
- Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 08:44:17 -0800
- To: <veillard@redhat.com>, "Chris Lilley" <chris@w3.org>
- Cc: "Bjoern Hoehrmann" <derhoermi@gmx.net>, <public-xml-id@w3.org>
Hi Daniel, > Nothing in the Namespace in XML spec implies that this binding >is static as you're claiming. Yes it does. The first definition in the recommendation defines a namespace to be a collection of names identified by a URI. If you change the collection of names, you change the namespace. Since the meaning of 'identify' is fairly clear, a different URI must be used to 'identify' the new collection. >> The meaning of 'reserved' is fairly clear. Another specification (such >> as XML canonicalization) should not be making assumptions about future >> registrations into the XMl namespace, since that namespace is reserved. > Amen ! As pointed out to Chris, the meaning of reserved may be clear, and I second your "Amen", but you have not looked at what is reserved because otherwise you wouldn't think it substantiates your point. John
Received on Tuesday, 8 February 2005 16:45:12 UTC