Re: Hypermedia - Why

I agree w/ David. the exact prefix (if any) is not a blocker to
establishing scope and reach of any new elements/attributes we want to
introduce to support hypermedia affordances.

We can sort that out if/when the time comes.

mca
+1.859.757.1449
http://amundsen.com/blog/
http://twitter.com@mamund
http://mamund.com/foaf.rdf#me




On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 8:43 AM, David Lee <David.Lee@marklogic.com> wrote:

> Call me back when you get an answer.
>
> Until then, we can proceed without worrying what namespace (if any) this
> work ends up  in.
>
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> David Lee
> Lead Engineer
> MarkLogic Corporation
> dlee@marklogic.com
> Phone: +1 650-287-2531
> Cell:  +1 812-630-7622
> www.marklogic.com
>
> This e-mail and any accompanying attachments are confidential. The
> information is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is
> addressed. Any review, disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of this
> e-mail communication by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the
> intended recipient, please notify us immediately by returning this message
> to the sender and delete all copies. Thank you for your cooperation.
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Rushforth, Peter [mailto:Peter.Rushforth@NRCan-RNCan.gc.ca]
> > Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2012 8:39 AM
> > To: David Lee; David Carlisle
> > Cc: public-xmlhypermedia@w3.org
> > Subject: RE: Hypermedia - Why
> >
> > To the spokespeople of the w3c: Why not the xml: namespace ?  You defined
> > the
> > architecture of the web, did you not?  Are the two incompatible in some
> way?
> >
> > Not willing to take it off the table until we hear "why" :-).
> >
> > Peter
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: David Lee [mailto:David.Lee@marklogic.com]
> > > Sent: July 26, 2012 08:36
> > > To: Rushforth, Peter; David Carlisle
> > > Cc: public-xmlhypermedia@w3.org
> > > Subject: RE: Hypermedia - Why
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > As to "why the xml namespace" aspect, I think it is
> > > important to hand
> > > > developers the tools for the job.  Namespaces are not part
> > > of XML, and
> > > > indeed not everyone wants to use them, and I think the goal
> > > of XML is
> > > > to be successful on the internet, namespaces or not.
> > > > To do that, I believe a language needs to have elements
> > > which reflect
> > > > the environment of deployment.
> > >
> > > I suggest pragmatically taking this goal of the table for the
> > > simple fact that it is not going to happen.
> > > W3C "owns" the "xml:" prefix. (and namespace).   They have
> > > made it perfectly clear the scope of things they are willing to add,
> > > and that scope is prety much zero right now.
> > > This is not a fight we will win, regardless of merit.  I bet
> > > you a 100 year old scotch on that.
> > >
> > > So I suggest, again pragmatically, that if this effort has
> > > *any* chance of adoption that it be implemented either with
> > > no namespace attributes or with a distinct non-xml: namespace
> > > or both     .
> > >
> > > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > > ---------------
> > > David Lee
> > > Lead Engineer
> > > MarkLogic Corporation
> > > dlee@marklogic.com
> > > Phone: +1 650-287-2531
> > > Cell:  +1 812-630-7622
> > > www.marklogic.com
> > >
> > > This e-mail and any accompanying attachments are
> > > confidential. The information is intended solely for the use
> > > of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any review,
> > > disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of this e-mail
> > > communication by others is strictly prohibited. If you are
> > > not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately by
> > > returning this message to the sender and delete all copies.
> > > Thank you for your cooperation.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
>