W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > January 2002

Encoding namespace convention

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 17:20:48 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <200201032220.RAA06039@markbaker.ca>
To: xml-dist-app@w3.org
I just noticed this from part 1;

"The serialization rules defined by SOAP (see [1]SOAP Encoding)
are identified by the URI "http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-encoding".
SOAP messages using this particular serialization SHOULD indicate
this using the SOAP encodingStyle attribute information item. In
addition, all URIs syntactically beginning with
"http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-encoding" indicate conformance with
the SOAP encoding rules defined in [1](SOAP Encoding), though with
potentially tighter rules added."

Is this really required?  My concern about it stems from something
I believe about URIs quite strongly; that they should be opaque[1]
(even if my views differ slightly from Tim's).  Asserting that two
resources (the default encoding, and some other compatible but tighter
encoding) are related because they start the same way, seems not very
opaque to me.  Better, IMO, would be requiring an RDF Schema
representation of each extended encoding resource that asserted that it
was a rdfs:subClassOf of the default encoding (or some other similar
assertion that better describes this relationship, if required).

 [1] http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Axioms.html#opaque

Mark Baker, Chief Science Officer, Planetfred, Inc.
Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.      mbaker@planetfred.com
http://www.markbaker.ca   http://www.planetfred.com
Received on Thursday, 3 January 2002 17:20:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:11:45 UTC