Re: Common Sense! Was: Re: The 'resource' identified by a namespace name URI should be the namespace

-----Original Message-----
From: John Cowan <cowan@locke.ccil.org>
To: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
Cc: xml-uri@w3.org <xml-uri@w3.org>
Date: Sunday, June 04, 2000 1:21 PM
Subject: Re: Common Sense! Was: Re: The 'resource' identified by a namespace
name URI should be the namespace


>Al Gilman scripsit:
>
>> On the other hand, there is an appropriate short circuit in the case
where
>> the binding is be definitive [as with XSLT], i.e. the document may create
>> and definitively describe just one namespace, in which case a reference
to
>> the document is suitable as an identifier for the namespace.  In this
case
>> the document itself defines a 1:1 relationship between namespace and
>> document and in identifying the namespace a reference to the document is
>> definitive.  The document has a unique proper namespace and the
>> identification is clear.
>
>I agree that the relationship is one-one (and even onto), but I deny
>that it amounts to identity.  Confounding the namespace with the document
>that describes it is a map-territory error.


Ah, but Al's map was the definitive map.

When you own a name, you can control what it means.
Therefore, you can write a spec which says "this spec is the definition
and the only definoition of the namespcace X" and you can by definition
be correct by definition.

Tim

>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 Tuesday, 6 June 2000 11:23:08 UTC