- From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
- Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 16:52:15 -0700
- To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
At 11:56 AM 15/06/97 -0700, Joe English wrote: >Presumably a namespace will define several names, so a single >declaration to identify the namespace as a whole should suffice. Yes. >Regarding URIs vs. FPIs: what would the URI point to? Unless >the ERB defines a concrete, machine-processable notation for >namespace definitions, there is little need for a machine-resolvable >address. Having recently been working on MCF, which is precisely a concrete, machine-processable notation for namespace definitions, I feel a strong need for a URI. >Then again, we already have a machine-processable notation for >defining element types: the (formal part of a) DTD! Yes, but it is woefully incomplete. DTDs say nothing about data typing to start with; extensible typing is the #1 base requirement of everyone with requirements in this area. This leads us to a big problem. We want metadata that includes, but is not limited to, the kinds of things you can do in a DTD. What's the solution? As for the rest of Joe's proposal, I'm trying to do a summary of where we stand... stay tuned. -Tim
Received on Tuesday, 17 June 1997 19:54:09 UTC