- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2006 09:29:35 -0400
- To: "Steven Pemberton" <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>
- Cc: "Ian B. Jacobs" <ij@w3.org>, Chairs@w3.org, www-tag@w3.org
Good point, Steven. We'll call it a toss-up 8-) And since you mention "#", I think the policy should definitely say something about it as another possible trailing character, but again, in the context of picking a standard so that names become consistent and predictable (as much as possible). I suppose I should at least propose a strawman, so here it is; - SHOULD use a trailing "/" - SHOULD NOT use a trailing "#" Mark. On 9/7/06, Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl> wrote: > On Thu, 07 Sep 2006 05:43:39 +0200, Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org> wrote: > > > I don't have any strong opinions on which option should be used, > > though I suppose having no slash is cleaner, saves a character, and is > > consistent with existing W3C namespace naming practice (last time I > > looked). > > Even though many existing namespaces have no trailing slash, I would > propose that if we adopt a rule for the new shortnames, that we make a > trailing slash the default. > > The reason that it can make a difference is in the context of semantic web > and qnames. In the HTML WG we want to talk about html:index, but since the > namespace is http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml, that resolves to > http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtmlindex, rather than the more malleable > http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/index > > Even if a group doesn't think it needs this, it may change its mind in the > future, and so it is best to leave the door open. > > (Note that several namespaces end in a '#' for the same reason). > > Steven Pemberton >
Received on Thursday, 7 September 2006 13:29:41 UTC