RE: QName URI Scheme Re-Visited, Revised, and Revealing

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Aaron Swartz []
> Sent: 27 August, 2001 16:36
> To: Stickler Patrick (NRC/Tampere)
> Cc:;
> Subject: Re: QName URI Scheme Re-Visited, Revised, and Revealing
> On Monday, August 27, 2001, at 03:43  AM, 
> wrote:
> > Fair enough. But they are still then limited to URIs which allow
> > direct partitioning into QNames. I.e. they can't use URIs with
> > bracketing syntax.
> I think you're beating a dead horse here. I agree with this, you 
> agree with this, Dan Connolly agrees with this, and it's on the 
> RDF issues list. What more do you want?

Nothing. I'm really not on some religious crusade here. It's
just seemed that every other response I get either is saying
there isn't a problem or is based on a misunderstanding of something
I said (or didn't say). Of course, the latter is an unavoidable
characteristic of this medium, and must be dealt with simply
by trying to clarify what was meant or not meant. The former
has been a bit confusing and frustrating -- though certainly due
a great deal to my own failure to communicate clearly. 

I'm very happy to leave the issue to the core working group, who
are far more knowledgeable and experienced in these matters
than I. I apologize if this issue has taken more time from the
core working group or the interest group than it is deemed to



Patrick Stickler                      Phone:  +358 3 356 0209
Senior Research Scientist             Mobile: +358 50 483 9453
Software Technology Laboratory        Fax:    +358 7180 35409
Nokia Research Center                 Video:  +358 3 356 0209 / 4227
Visiokatu 1, 33720 Tampere, Finland   Email:

Received on Monday, 27 August 2001 10:10:34 UTC