- From: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 17:49:30 -0400
- To: <xml-uri@w3.org>, "Eve L. Maler" <Eve.Maler@east.sun.com>
I think the confusion was that Dan agreed to "points to" only in the sense of "identifies" *not* in the sense of "must be able to be dereferenced to a representation of". -----Original Message----- From: Eve L. Maler <Eve.Maler@east.sun.com> To: xml-uri@w3.org <xml-uri@w3.org> Date: Wednesday, June 21, 2000 1:52 PM Subject: Re: namespace usage as assertions >At 12:08 PM 6/21/00 -0500, Dan Connolly wrote: >>That's not the case. Every URI, by definition, identifies/points to a >>resource. >>URI means "Uniform Resource Identifier"; URIs identify resources. >>cf RFC2396 for the exact definition. > >If you're serious about "points to," then despite your urgings when we did >the original Namespaces work, we should not have used URIs for namespace >names because pointing to something was "not a goal." > > Eve >-- >Eve Maler +1 781 442 3190 >Sun Microsystems XML Technology Center elm @ east.sun.com >
Received on Wednesday, 21 June 2000 17:48:00 UTC