- From: David Carlisle <david@dcarlisle.demon.co.uk>
- Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 18:55:33 +0100 (BST)
- To: masinter@attlabs.att.com
- CC: xml-uri@w3.org
> For example, the definition for the namespace of XSLT at > http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt#xslt-namespace says: That document defines the XSLT language. namespaces as such don't have any definition. <a href="mailto:masinter@attlabs.att.com"/> is a conforming namespace document that consists of an element with local name a and namespace name mailto:masinter@attlabs.att.com (It is implied, but the namespace spec doesn't say, that I shouldn't use that, but you may.) > This means that there are many URIs that are *inappropriate* > for use as namespace names, because they don't actually match the > namespace name given in the namespace definition. Since the namespace rec does not introduce any notion of defining namespaces, I don't know where you got this statement from. It is not how namespaces work. > No other URI is appropriate for using with the XSLT namespace -- > not even http://WWW.W3.ORG/1999/XSL/Transform (which differs > only by the case of the host name). That is true, but the namespace spec _explictly_ mentions that URI which differ by case and would retrieve the same resource are different namespace names, so http://WWW.W3.ORG/1999/XSL/Transform is a perfectly valid namespace name, it just isn't the XSLT namespace. > Consider the following algorithm for definining a namespace: The algorithm for picking a namespace name is already defined, and it isn't that, it is: take a valid URI reference. It is proposed by some people (an influential minority, as far as I can see) to change that to: take a valid "absolute URI + fragment id" But in neither case does it involve "defining" anything. > Using "http://WWW.W3.ORG/1999/XSL/Transform" as a namespace name is > just an error. Don't do it. On the contrary it is explictly endorsed as legal by the namespace rec to have two namespace names differing only by case. David
Received on Friday, 2 June 2000 14:18:53 UTC