Divide the problem

I think that one of the reasons why this dicussiosn takes so long and
progresses so slowly is that several issues have been thrown together. Maybe
we should focus on properly defining them, and to then discuss them
separately.

#1 is the original question about how to handle relative URI refs in a
namespace name.

#2 produces the most heat here: What is the namespace name? Is it really
just a name which happens to follow the URI ref syntax (a), or should it be
treated as an URI [+fragment id] (b).

(a) is what the official W3C recommendation says. (b) seems to be what TBL
and some others would prefer. Even *if* one would go for (b), I claim that
you still wouldn't be able to put something at the specified location, until
there exists a W3C recommendation which actually defines what to expect
there. Specifically, the new approach of putting XML Schema files at
locations specified by W3C namespace names should be immediately stopped
until there is a consensus about this.

Julian

Received on Thursday, 8 June 2000 04:07:03 UTC