- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2012 19:58:26 +0000
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1974 --- Comment #10 from C. M. Sperberg-McQueen <cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com> 2012-02-15 19:58:23 UTC --- If a statement from the owner of a namespace NS that a particular name N in that namespace names a particular thing T does not suffice to make it the case that name N in namespace NS names thing T, then what kind of action can make it the case? Perhaps I have always misunderstood the nature of the problem leading to this bug report: I thought the problem was that people who wanted to know what a given URI denotes should be able to dereference that URI and find some human-readable (and perhaps also some machine-processable) information that helps them understand the denotation of the URI, and our namespace document doesn't do an acceptable job of helping either humans or machines understand the URIs which denote the built-in datatypes and the other things in the XSD namespace. But that understanding centers on the quality of the human- and machine-readable documentation for those URIs, not on a conflation of datatypes with HTML elements. If the plan described in comment 6 is no good because HTML elements are not datatypes, then how is any namespace owner to document the namespace? The only URIs whose meaning can conveniently be explained by means of a human-readable HTML element would then appear to be URIs denoting elements in HTML documents -- an interesting but not exhaustive subclass of URIs. One commonly held view is that what is delivered when a URI is dereferenced is a representation of the resource, not necessarily the resource itself. On that view, the idea of providing an HTML document describing the resource denoted (here, an HTML element describing the datatype denoted by a URI) is both coherent and desirable, and does not give rise to the erroneous conclusion that the resource denoted by the URI is an HTML document or element. Can anyone explain in words of one syllable what is wrong with that commonly held view that makes it necessary to change course on this issue? -- Configure bugmail: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 15 February 2012 19:58:32 UTC