Re: uri-comp draft necessary?

Tim/Dan: please say "stop" if you think that there are now plenty of 
for the uri-comp draft.

Am Donnerstag, 19.12.02, um 09:40 Uhr (Europe/Berlin) schrieb Miles 

> wrote,
>> Would it make sense to augment the normative Namespaces rule on
>> character-by-character comparison with a health warning:  "NOTE:
>> although namespace identity is determined on a character match basis,
>> users are strongly discouraged from intentionally creating distinct
>> namespaces named by URIs that would be considered equal per RFC 2396
>> or other governing specifications."  Or some such.
> In what _practical_ way is this different from changing the Namespaces
> rule from character-by-character comparison to RFC 2396/deployed
> network infrastructure comparison?
> This is the core of my complaint here: the push for namespace documents
> will inevitably lead to a de facto revision of the Namespaces REC, and
> that's too big a change to introduce by the back door.

Maybe it leads to that, maybe not. What is needed in the meantime is
clear, documented advice how to chose namespace URIs so that
implementers do not paint themselves into a corner when designing
new systems.

Obviously such advice would refer to the "uri comparision ladder" or
be part of it.


Received on Thursday, 19 December 2002 07:58:37 UTC