- From: John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
- Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2000 12:12:08 -0400
- To: David Carlisle <david@dcarlisle.demon.co.uk>, "xml-uri@w3.org" <xml-uri@w3.org>
David Carlisle wrote: > This is why I am not too concerned that using relative namespace names > is not rdf friendly, as using uuid or similar schemes also causes > problems for rdf's notion of sticking element names on to the end of > namespace names and hoping to get a valid uri. Actually, it's no problem: "uuid:xxx-xxxx-xxxxx-xxxxxx#foo" is a valid URI reference (not URI), so setting the namespace name to "uuid:xxx-xxxx-xxxxx-xxxxxx#" is not a problem. > Basically any namespace that > is declared by xmlns:x="x" is probably of only transient interest > anyway, and not the kind of thing one would want to set up rdf > schema to describe. On the "literal" interpretation, yes. On the "absolutizing" interpretation, it's simply a namespace that is close, in URI space, to the document in which the reference appears (a sibling, as it were), and might be perfectly global. -- Schlingt dreifach einen Kreis um dies! || John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com> Schliesst euer Aug vor heiliger Schau, || http://www.reutershealth.com Denn er genoss vom Honig-Tau, || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan Und trank die Milch vom Paradies. -- Coleridge (tr. Politzer)
Received on Thursday, 1 June 2000 12:12:49 UTC