Re: Minimum required of a system called "Namespaces in XML"

Michael Mealling wrote:

> Sure. I'd be happy with that. Any suggestions for what that Base
> should be?

How about http://www.w3.org/2000/Namespaces/Base/ ?
 
> BUT, http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform and
> http://WWW.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform are equivalent URIs and IMHO,
> the namespace document should inherit that equivalence rule, not
> try and come up with its own...

The trouble is that we only know they're equivalent because we have
special knowledge about the http: scheme.  Namespace processors shouldn't
(IMHO) have to have scheme-specific knowledge.
 
> Not necessarily. You could in RDF say that you are making assertions about
> that URI as its treated as an XML Namespace.  For example, lets take the
> case of GUIDs as defined by Microsoft. They contain a timestamp and
> a MAC address. So according to your assertions they name a slice of time
> on some computer with a particular NIC. Now, if I use that GUID to name
> some COM object I'm not saying that the COM object represents that
> slice of time, instead I'm using that unique slice of time and place
> to name the COM object.

Hmm.  I need to think about this example further.

-- 

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 Monday, 5 June 2000 15:27:33 UTC