Re: Revisiting namespaceDocument-8

/ was heard to say:
| Now the questions about namespaces:  is a namespace an information 
| resource and therefore the sort of thing that can respond with a 200? 
| Certainly it's abstract in a way that the poet is not.  It has no mass and 
| won't knock you over if you run into it.   Web Arch characterizes an 
| information resource as  one for which  "all of their essential 
| characteristics can be conveyed in a message"[1] What are the essential 
| characteristics of a namespace, and can they be completely conveyed? 

I expect there's a gray area somewhere between cars, which we seem to
have agreement are not information resources and poems which we seem
to have agreement are information resources.

I'm comfortable saying that a namespace name is an information
resource. Namespaces are a mechanism for disambiguating local names
and I think anything you could want to express about them, you could
express in a message.

I think if we went looking, we could probably find poets and
philosophers willing to argue that there were ineffable,
non-information qualities about poems. I don't think the web
architecture would be improved by doing so. By the same token, I don't
think the architecture is harmed by saying that a namespace name is an
information resource.

| Obviously, the last thing I'd advocate is a full reopening of 
| httpRange-14, but I do think it's worth convincing ourselves that the 
| resolution we've adopted can be applied consistently and conveniently to 
| the important case of namespaces and their descriptions.   If we stick 
| with our resolution of httpRange-14, then I think we need to be prepared 
| to set out what the information is that "comprises a namespace", so that 
| we can show that it can be "conveyed", or else we need to suggest use of 
| two URI's and a 303 for each namespace.

I put my stake in the sand above. :-)

                                        Be seeing you,

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 Tuesday, 28 June 2005 14:18:19 UTC