Re: 1343 messages later

David Carlisle wrote:
> 
> > Reading this again, I'm realizing the genius of Microsoft's proposal, which
> > lets Tim and I both feel right,
> 
> Isn't that just because it is so vague it can mean anything to anyone,

That's my feeling too at the moment.  As far as I can tell, all it does
is point out that some cases are easy, but it doesn't help with the hard
cases.  In comparing two namespace names, we can distinguish four cases:

1. both names are absolute; this case is easy since both the literal and
absolutize approaches give the same answer.

2. both names are relative and both names occur in the same entity and
thus have the same base URI; in this case the literal and absolutize
approaches differ only on how "." and ".." path segments are treated;
also the literal approach in this case doesn't give rise to any cases
where namespace names are namespace equal but refer to different
resources; I think the Microsoft proposal is proposing the literal
approach in this case (but I'm not sure)

3. one name is relative and one is absolute; here the literal and
absolute approaches give completely different answers; I don't know what
the Microsoft proposal is proposing here; the literal approach here is
not too bad here because again in this case it doesn't give rise to any
cases where namespace names are namespace equal but refer to different
resources.

4. both names are relative but the namespace declarations have different
base URIs; here the literal and absolute approaches give completely
different answers; this is the really controversial case because the
literal approach here can treat as equal two namespace names that refer
to different resources (which is anathema to the absolutizers)

A proposal that doesn't say clearly what happens in case 4 doesn't get
us anywhere. It has to be answered by the namespaces Rec, because it can
arise within a single XML document when there are external entities.

Possible answers for case 4 include:

A.  They are considered equal if they are character-for-character
identical after absolutization (the absolute approach)

B.  They are considered equal if the namespace names are
character-for-character identical regardless of the base URI (the
literal approach)

C.  They are considered not to be equal in this case

What is it?

James

Received on Thursday, 15 June 2000 05:48:56 UTC