- From: Larry Masinter <masinter@attlabs.att.com>
- Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 02:16:04 -0700
- To: "Liam Quin" <liam@holoweb.net>, <xml-uri@w3.org>
> There are two approaches to this that we have seen: > (1) force a constant name for each namespace, and require that the > namespace be invoked using that exact name. > > This mandates that www.W3.org/X and www.w3.org/X and www.w3.org/X/ > are all different, and probably that only one of them is correct > for a given namespace. I believe this is correct. Part of 'giving' a namespace (so that it is a given namespace, of course) is giving the namespace name. (Of course, your examples are all wrong! Since they're missing the "http://" at the beginning!) > (2) if an XMP processor or other names-space-aware application encounters > a namespace it does not recognise exactly, require that it either > [2a] stop processing and signal an error, or > [2b] dereference the namespace and interpret what it finds. > It may seem like there is an option [2c], in which a processor ignores > namespacess it doesn't recognise, and also [2d], HTML Mode, in which > a processor uses case-insensitve compariton, soundex, and other > heuristics, in order to intuit the possible error. Neither of these > are options in an XML environment where so-called Draconian error > handling is the norm. It's illegal to process a non-well-formed > document and label it as XML. I think that [2a] is the correct behavior; in some strange way, you can think of [2b] as a way of increasing the number of cases where the XMP processor or namespace-aware application 'recognises exactly' the namespace; otherwise, we haven't defined what it means to 'interpret what it finds', unless what it finds upon 'dereference' is something that *does* allow it to recognize the namespace name exactly. > What should be at the other end of the URI is a separate question. Not really.
Received on Saturday, 3 June 2000 05:16:23 UTC