- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: 09 Dec 2002 15:59:28 -0600
- To: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org
On Mon, 2002-12-09 at 15:41, David Orchard wrote: > > Dan, > > I have a very big concern that most namespace names will become used as URIs > to XML Schema documents. That trend is already occuring. And XML Schema > documents are, how shall I say it, not very human understandable. The XMLP > group has provided wonderful rationale for why required machine > understandable references (DTDs) in a document are a bad thing. They did? I presume you mean # XMLP WG Response on "SOAP and the Internal Subset" David Fallside (Mon, Dec 09 2002) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2002Dec/0119.html I don't think I understand what you mean by "machine understandable references (DTDs) in a document" let alone do I see any argument against such in that message. Could you elaborate a bit w.r.t. the examples I gave below? What exactly is the problem in these cases? > Widespread > adoption of XML Schemas for namespace name documents will cause the same > problem(s). XML Schema documents or DTDs, the logic is the same. > > Cheers, > Dave > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: www-tag-request@w3.org > > [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of > > Dan Connolly > > Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 12:59 PM > > To: www-tag@w3.org > > Subject: what's wrong with using XML Schema/HTML/RDF to document > > namespaces? > > > > > > > > I invite folks to use this namespace > > name in their documents: > > > > http://www.w3.org/XML/2000/04schema-hacking/my > > > > If you GET that thing, you'll find > > an XML Schema document which allows > > a machine to distinguish a syntactic > > subset of XML documents that are > > consistent with my expectations. > > > > Why is that not OK? > > > > i.e. DaveO, please elaborate... > > > > "20:49:07 [DaveO] > > I will object to XML Schema being OK." > > -- http://www.w3.org/2002/12/09-tagmem-irc > > > > Likewise > > http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns > > > > if you dereference that, you get an RDF Schema. > > What's wrong with that? > > > > Likewise, if you dereference > > http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml > > you get an HTML document. > > > > What's wrong with that? > > > > -- > > Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Monday, 9 December 2002 16:59:18 UTC