- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@ebuilt.com>
- Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 13:49:06 -0800
- To: Jason Crawford <ccjason@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: uri@w3.org, "'WebDAV'" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
On Wed, Nov 28, 2001 at 04:15:23PM -0500, Jason Crawford wrote: > > Roy, > > > In other words, I think that "scheme:" is only a valid identifier for the > > namespace if the scheme defines it as such. > > What are you suggesting here? Where would a scheme define it as such? > Would this require a change to 2396 that you'd support? Or some place > else? If two or more independent implementations are doing something with the protocol that is not allowed by the RFC, and rough consensus within the working group is that those implementations are doing no harm, then the protocol specification should change to accommodate them. Whatever change is made to 2396 will have to also take into account the history of existing implementations. That doesn't mean it will change any time soon, but we can add it to the list of errata, which I need to compile anyway. I still think it is incredibly stupid for the webdav examples to be using "D:" as an xmlns, since the only thing that accomplishes is an unnecessary dependency on XML namespaces. ....Roy
Received on Wednesday, 28 November 2001 16:54:17 UTC