- From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
- Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 12:27:24 -0800
- To: "Norman Walsh" <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>, <www-tag@w3.org>
I've been thinking about the relationship of namespaces to version identifiers for a while. Perhaps the version attribute could be relative and then appended to the ns uri, ie ns#version=5 or ns#version/5 or ns/version/5? Cheers, Dave > -----Original Message----- > From: www-tag-request@w3.org [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of > Norman Walsh > Sent: Friday, February 18, 2005 7:22 AM > To: www-tag@w3.org > Subject: Re: Significant W3C Confusion over Namespace Meaning and Policy > > / Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com> was heard to say: > [...] > | What counts is that it is clear which version of which > | model must be used to interpret the data, and ideally, > | each version of each model would be identified by a > | distinct URI which is communicated to the recieving > | agent and via which, information specifically about > | that particular version of that particular model could > | be obtained. > > I'm hoping that the combination of namespace name and version will be > sufficient. Making the version a URI might be a good idea though, > since DocBook can be extended by others. (Without changing the > namespace!? Yep. Such has it always been with DocBook.) > > Be seeing you, > norm > > -- > 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 Friday, 18 February 2005 20:27:29 UTC