- From: Dare Obasanjo <dareo@microsoft.com>
- Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 14:14:22 -0800
- To: "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>, <www-tag@w3.org>
The question you should first ask yourself is "What is the purpose of namespace documents?". I suggest reading Tim Bray's 14 theses of namespace documents at http://www.textuality.com/tag/Issue8.html particularly focusing on points 7, 10,12,13 and 14. Tim has already made good arguments as to why a schema (not just one conforming to the W3C XML Schema recommendation) is not the most desirable document to use as a namespace document. From my perspective, the clamor for namespace documents has always been about human readable documents available at "design time", a schema of any sort does not fit the bill especially not a W3C XML Schema document. I wouldn't mind seeing documentation based on a schema such as the output of XS3P (http://titanium.dstc.edu.au/xml/xs3p/) the results of GETing an namespace document. -- PITHY WORDS OF WISDOM Freedom is the right to be wrong not the right to do wrong. This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dan Connolly [mailto:connolly@w3.org] > Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 12:59 PM > To: www-tag@w3.org > > > 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/ > > >
Received on Monday, 9 December 2002 17:14:57 UTC