Re: The 'resource' identified by a namespace name URI should be the namespace

Tim Berners-Lee scripsit:

> We are losing track of reality. A mailto: URI necessarily identifies
> an internet mailbox.  A mailbox is a mailbox. A namespace is a namesapce.
> A mailbox can be a group-mailbox. A mailbox can be a personal-mailbox.
> A mailbox can NOT be a namespace.

Neither can a (text, hypertext, hypermedia) document BE a namespace.
Not even if it contains an XML Schema document.

> isa (x, mailbox) => not (isa(x, namespace))
> 
> I can make assertions about a mailbox. (This mailbox is the source of much
> spam)
> I can make assertions about a namespace (this namespace is a sublanguage of
> that namespace).
> But namespaces and mailboxes are distinct.

Just so.  You can make assertions about a schema (this schema is written
in XML Schema language).  You can make assertions about a namespace.
Namespaces and schemata are distinct.  Namespaces and documents of any
sort are distinct.  They shouldn't be named by the same URIs.

So the URI of the XSLT namespace can't be "http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform".
That is its name all right, by the XSLT Rec.  But its URI needs to be
something different.  But what?

Well, we might have to split a hair or two to find out.

Namespace *names* have the syntax of URI references because the Namespace
Rec says so.  They could have had the syntax of Java packages instead,
or could have had no particular syntax.  The Namespace Rec says nothing
about the URI which identifies a namespace resource.

-- 
John Cowan                                   cowan@ccil.org
	Yes, I know the message date is bogus.  I can't help it.
		--me, on far too many occasions

Received on Saturday, 3 June 2000 01:11:17 UTC