- From: David Carlisle <david@dcarlisle.demon.co.uk>
- Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 10:03:59 +0100 (BST)
- To: cce@clarkevans.com
- CC: xml-uri@w3.org
> Those that point to "nowhere" should be fixed. You can only fix things that are broken. > They can be deprechiated, or as John Cowan suggests, treated > as if they have a "data:" in front of them. John's proposal of using data: is a mechanism for generating a URI to refer to the namespace from the namespace name. So that rdf and other such systems may make statements about the namespace. This is perfectly reasonable thing to suggest, irrespective of the format of the namespace name itself (which is the subject of this list) So whether namespace names were FPI or URI or any other syntax there is still a reasonable requirement to generate a URI for the namespace from the name. The important thing to stress is that the namespace is _not_ the resource identified by the URI used as the namespace name. Namespace name allocation works by you naming your namespaces with the URI of some resource you control, but that is not at all the same thing as saying that resource is the namespace. David
Received on Thursday, 1 June 2000 05:44:58 UTC