W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > July 2002

Re: TB16 Re: Comments on arch doc draft

From: Ian B. Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 14:45:06 -0400
Message-ID: <3D20A332.7080405@w3.org>
To: Dare Obasanjo <dareo@microsoft.com>
CC: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>, Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>, www-tag@w3.org

Dare Obasanjo wrote:
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Tim Berners-Lee [mailto:timbl@w3.org] 
>>Sent: Monday, July 01, 2002 11:03 AM
>>To: Tim Bray; www-tag@w3.org
>>Subject: TB16 Re: Comments on arch doc draft
>>The only example I can think of where they are not
>>allowed (xmlns) was shown to be a problem at our Hawaii
>>tag face-face, when most of the GET URI for a query was
>>a namespace URI which could have been dramatically
>>shortened if made relative to the URI of the query itself!
> I must have missed this having only recently joined the WWW-TAG list but
> since when was GETting namespace names considered to be acceptable
> practice that should be encouraged? Note, I am not agreeing or
> disagreeing with the policy mentioned at 
> 	http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xppa
> but instead just touching on a semi-related issue. 

The TAG has not yet reached consensus on
issue namespaceDocument-8 [1]: What should a
"namespace document" look like?

It is my understanding that at the TAG's 12 Feb 2002
face-to-face meeting [2], there was a lot of agreement that
namespace URIs should be dereferencable (to find useful
explanatory material).

However, the TAG has not yet reached consensus on the
nature of that dereferenced material. The TAG discussed
the value of human readable materials, schemas, and
indirections to useful adjuncts.

I believe there are some people who won't support
the principle that namespace URIs should be dereferencable
until the second question has been resolved.

  - Ian

[1] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#namespaceDocument-8
[2] http://www.w3.org/2002/02/12-tagmem-irc

Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel:                     +1 718 260-9447
Received on Monday, 1 July 2002 14:48:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:55:52 UTC