> At the end of the day, it would be great if this community could agree on > *one* mapping between the two formats. I'd get laughed out of the room if > I suggested as a work item for our developer team to map the n-to-n > possible ways a media type can be expressed as a URI as something we should > implement in any of our products. Me too. Personally, I think it is absurd to require all namespaces be represented as absolute URI. That is a pointless waste of bandwidth and doesn't reflect the lessons learned from real-life usage of URI. It is nice to be able to map any name to a universally-complete namespace with a standardized root, but only if the common case is for the important bits to be represented as a relative URI. It doesn't even need to have a real base -- just an imaginary one. Of course, nobody can do that with the URN syntax, which is why I won't be using it. ....RoyReceived on Tuesday, 25 September 2001 20:03:35 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Sunday, 10 October 2021 22:17:39 UTC