- From: james anderson <james.anderson@mecomnet.de>
- Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 11:37:40 +0200
- To: xml-uri@w3.org
David Carlisle wrote: > > > Should that not be true, > > that certainly is not true. In general or in particular for most > namespaces used as xslt extensions, almost all of which use http > URI pointing at non existent files. > > There is absolutely no guarantee that a namespace name with a http uri > scheme will return anything other than a 404 error if you attempt to > dereference it. Then one shouldn't be using an HTTP URI. > > > then it's time to throw the whole thing out and start over. > > Or rather leave namespaces as they are, and if you are doing something > which is explictly not a goal of namespace rec (like retrieving a > resource at some URI) then if the namespace mechanism is not suitable, > use something else, don't try to warp the namespace mechanism to fit > your needs. > That is my understanding of where they are. Maybe I'm just old-fashioned. When I have invited guests for dinner, and I show them to their seat at the table, I do my best to resist the urge to pull the chair out from under them as then sit down. > David
Received on Friday, 9 June 2000 05:26:32 UTC