- From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@mysterylights.com>
- Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 01:33:49 +0100
- To: "Aaron Swartz" <aswartz@swartzfam.com>, "RDF Interest" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
- Cc: "Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@openhealth.org>
"Aaron Swartz" <mailto:aswartz@swartzfam.com> wrote:-
> The use of the XSD namespace in an XML document signals
> to an XSD processor that the content of the document is an
> XML Schema.
The use of the XSD namespace simply denotes that one is referring to a
set of names within that namespace. Hence, XSV uses something like:-
{http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema}element
If you change the namespace name, then you are referring to a
different set of names altogether; end of story. By adding the hash to
the namespace, you are changing the bag of names that you are
referring to (the name "space"), and so unless you declare an
equivalence, and XMLNS parser should treat these as dissimilar. Can
you point me to a specification which defines these namespaces as
being equivalent?
> http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema# (notice the extra # sign)
>
> An XSD processor will not recognize this as an XML Schema
> document (good -- it isn't) and will not process it.
Er... but the http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema namespace is not an XML
Schema document either - are you saying it should be?
> The secondary point -- that a different namespace is used in each
> document -- is done correctly, since to use the same namespace would
> needlessly confuse processors.
Come again? Namespaces are only identical when they're identical. If
you're using a new namespace, then you should state in some
specification both why you're using it, and what it represents.
--
Kindest Regards,
Sean B. Palmer
@prefix : <http://webns.net/roughterms/> .
:Sean :hasHomepage <http://purl.org/net/sbp/> .
Received on Friday, 4 May 2001 20:32:23 UTC