- From: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 17:45:11 -0400
- To: "Clark C. Evans" <cce@clarkevans.com>, "David Carlisle" <david@dcarlisle.demon.co.uk>
- Cc: <cce@clarkevans.com>, <xml-uri@w3.org>
-----Original Message----- From: Clark C. Evans <cce@clarkevans.com> To: David Carlisle <david@dcarlisle.demon.co.uk> Cc: cce@clarkevans.com <cce@clarkevans.com>; xml-uri@w3.org <xml-uri@w3.org> Date: Sunday, May 28, 2000 11:31 AM Subject: Re: Namespace names: a modification of a semi-serious proposal >On Sun, 28 May 2000, David Carlisle wrote: >> > What use would "mid:" or "cid:" have as a namespace name? >> >> The very purpose for which namespaces are designed. >> They provide globally unique identifiers without the need to wait >> for iso to give you an FPI prefix. > >IMHO, "data:com.clarkevans.timesheet.submit" >[or "http:\\clarkevans.com\timesheet\submit.xml"] >are just as unique, and far more readable. But that means the resource whose only and definitive *representation* is "com.clarkvans.timesheet.submit". Someone said you can't dereference a data: URI. Wrong - you can verey easily. When you dereference "data:com.clarkevans.timesheet.submit" you get "com.clarkevans.timesheet.submit" The meaning of to "dereference" is "to aquire a digital representation of that identified by". If you make a system which allows dereferencing but renders soemthing random then it is not what people would expect. timbl > > >
Received on Thursday, 1 June 2000 17:45:19 UTC