- From: Andy Powell <a.powell@ukoln.ac.uk>
- Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 07:32:51 +0000 (GMT)
- To: Ray Denenberg <raydenenberg@starpower.net>
- cc: www-zig@w3.org
On Fri, 28 Mar 2003, Ray Denenberg wrote: > Sorry, perhaps I wasn't clear in what I was suggesting. I *wasn't* > suggesting that a URI shouldn't be used, only that it need not be a > namespace URI, nor an XML schema location. It can simply identify a > schema definition, and a schema in the broad sense, not necessarily > (though possibly) an XML schema. For example mike can define > http://www.miketaylor.org.uk/dcx to mean whatever he wants it to mean > (and if he wants to he can put up a definition at that address, in > plain english) and it will be unambiguous because he is the naming > authority for that domain. And no, a profile should not redefine that > definition. Ray, can you confirm that my understanding of what you are saying is correct... 1) where the record syntax is XML, the "schema" being used is named in the ESN. 2) the name *may* be a URI. [I presume that this is *may* rather than *must*] 3) if the name is a URI, the URI need not resolve to anything. 4) if the name is a URI and the URI does resolve to something, that something may be an XML schema, an RDF schema, a text description of the schema or something else. 5) URIs in the ESN should be used to uniquely name one schema. I.e. URIs should not be used to name more than one schema and each schema should, as far as possible, only be assigned one URI. Andy -- Distributed Systems, UKOLN, University of Bath, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ukoln/staff/a.powell +44 1225 383933 Resource Discovery Network http://www.rdn.ac.uk/
Received on Saturday, 29 March 2003 02:32:55 UTC