- From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
- Date: Wed, 07 May 2003 11:56:01 -0700
- To: Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com
- Cc: LMM@acm.org, sandro@w3.org, uri@w3.org
Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com wrote:
> URIs used as XML Namespaces do *not* denote those namespaces.
>
> XML Namespaces are punctuation. They are macros. They are
> syntactic sugar for XML instances so that URIs can be
> used as element and attribute names (by a little bit of
> slight of hand).
You have now expressed this opinion on many occasions dating back quite
a few months. I remain unconvinced. Yes, the main utility of
namespaces has been to sneak URIs into element/attribute names to
support dispatching and collision avoidance. But if we choose to say
that the URIs thus used do actually identify resources, and provide
representations of them, this breaks nothing and is actually useful in
the real world. So why not?
--
Cheers, Tim Bray
(ongoing fragmented essay: http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/)
Received on Wednesday, 7 May 2003 14:56:04 UTC