W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > December 2005

Re: Revised namespaceState-48 finding (16 Dec 2005)

From: Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 16:08:26 -0500
To: www-tag@w3.org
Message-ID: <8764pkztf9.fsf@nwalsh.com>
/ Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> was heard to say:
| On Fri, 2005-12-16 at 15:07 -0500, Norman Walsh wrote:
|> Per my action from the 13 Dec 2005 TAG telcon, please find a revised
|> finding on the issue of namespaceState-48 at
|>   http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/namespaceState-2005-12-16.html
| "The terms in a namespace are two-part identifiers consisting of a
| namespace name (a URI) and a local name (an NCName as defined in [XML
| Namespaces])."
| Is that derived from existing specs? It seems to be a new constraint;
| one that I'm not comfortable with.

Uh. From Namespace in XML 1.1[1], Section 2.1

  [Definition: An XML namespace is identified by an IRI reference;...

So the namespace is the URI and

  [Definition: An expanded name is a pair consisting of a namespace
  name and a local name. ] ... It is this
  combination of the universally managed IRI namespace with the
  vocabulary's local names that is effective in avoiding name clashes.

the terms are two-part identifiers consisting of a namespace name and
a local name. (BTW, I believe the same is true in Namespaces in XML
1.0, I chose the 1.1 version only because I believe it is generally
believed to contain clearer prose.)

| According to the 'Identify with URI' good practice,
|   http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#pr-use-uris
| they should be just URIs, like in RDF; for example,
| the terms in the RDFS namespace are
|  http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label
|  http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#subClassOf
|  http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#subPropertOf
| etc.
| That's the easiest way to satisfy the QName Mapping requirement.
|  http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#qname-mapping

Concatentation is the easiest way, but there's no universally accepted

| Namespaces that use tricky or unspecified mappings to URIs don't
| lend themselves to cross-language use and shouldn't be encouraged,
| let alone baked-in.

Nevertheless, they exist.

                                        Be seeing you,

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xml-names11-20040204/

Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM / XML Standards Architect / Sun Microsystems, Inc.
NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information.
Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited.
If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by
reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.

Received on Monday, 19 December 2005 21:08:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:56:10 UTC