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

RE: TB16 Re: Comments on arch doc draft

From: Dare Obasanjo <dareo@microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 22:50:07 -0700
Message-ID: <8BD7226E07DDFF49AF5EF4030ACE0B7E06621D7E@red-msg-06.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Tim Bray" <tbray@textuality.com>, <www-tag@w3.org>

-----Original Message----- 
From: Tim Bray [mailto:tbray@textuality.com] 
Sent: Mon 7/1/2002 10:21 PM 
To: www-tag@w3.org 
Subject: Re: TB16 Re: Comments on arch doc draft

>> This seems fine to me.  But for God's sake let's make sure any guidance
>> on this makes it very clear that this is a namespace *name*, and
> >although it may function as a stand-in for the namespace URI, it is
> >*not* the URI.
>Er, please try again.  I don't understand the above. -Tim

I assume Josh is talking about the fact that the Namespaces in XML recommendation specifies a mechanism for disambiguating XML elements and attributes by attaching them to a unique name which for their purposes they chose the set of URIs. This was unfortunate in that these dissambiguating mechanisms became overloaded in that they are both unique names (namespace names) as well as locations and identifiers for resources on the Internet (the unfortunate namespace URIs as they are NOT called in the Namespaces in XML recommendation but in the ones that came after it like the XPath and XSLT RECs). 

However since the Namespaces In XML recommendation considers http://www.25hoursaday.com different from http://WWW.25hoursaday.COM or while most if not all DNS systems do not. A namespace name is not necessarily interchangeable with a namespace URI. 

Received on Tuesday, 2 July 2002 01:50:39 UTC

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