xml-uri@w3.org from June 2000 by subject

"data:,<name>" proposal adds an extra level

(no subject)

1343 messages later

<a:b:c> and xlink

a clarification?

A new proposal (was: Re: which layer for URI processing?)

a personal conclusion.....

A proposed solution

A proposed solution (base edge cases)

Annotation protocols [was: How namespace names might be used]

Another endorsement of Dan Connolly's recent proposal

Attribute uniqueness test: a radical proposal

Background material, belated

Banning relative - No real damage?

Base-less fears (was Moving On...)

Can everyone be happy?

Can we get past these @#X! axioms?

Chaos, Process

Choose your namespace (Was : Personal view)

Closure (was Re: typo/bug in the namespace spec)

Collect Proposed wordings (Was: Can everyone be happy?)

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

Comparing URI references as strings

Compromise?: absolutize but require xml:base

Context and... Re: the case of two bats

D. Carlisle lone user (was : Microsoft tools)

Database example was: The Kesselman/Connoly proposal

Decentralization (was Re: Choose your namespace (Was : Personal view))

defaulting namespace attributes with relative URI references

Deprecate/Undefined (was Request for status dump and issues check)

Differentiating literal and forbid (Re: Personal view)

Divide the problem

Documents, Anchors, Nodes and Context was: RE: Context and... Re: the case of two bats

Does every URI identify a resource? (Was:Re: namespace usage as assertions)

essential test cases?

Fixed base

For literals: why I changed my mind

fundamental difference?

fundamental differences? (again) (was The 'resource')

Fwd: Re: How namespace names might be used

General concerns (was Re: Request for status dump...)

How are semantics named?

how does XML Base affects well-formedness? [was: red/green XML]

How namespace names might be used

href="foo"

I have a dream

Implied best practices (was Re: How namespace names might be used)

In praise of fixed base was: Layering XPath/XSLT namespaces is unacceptable

Infererence by scheme (Re: namespace usage as assertions)

Injective Quality (Was: Re: URIs quack like a duck)

Is a namesapce a resource? - was: duck

Is a namespace [always] a [shared] resource?

Is a namespace a resource? - was: duck

Is file:///foo a URI?

jettisoning baggage

Language = Namespace. was: How namespace names might be used

layering is consistent and coherent

Layering XPath/XSLT namespaces is unacceptable

Literal Approach + Locality Warning (Was: A proposed solution

Local Context [was: Why I moved from Forbid to Literal]

Making the namespace resource "real"

Mechanism, not policy [was: Attribute uniqueness...]

Microsoft tools

Minimum required of a system called "Namespaces in XML"

More nervousness about NS Names bearing semantics

Moving on (was Re: URIs quack like a duck)

Namespace names: a modification of a semi-serious proposal

namespace usage as assertions

Namespace-by-retrieval is consistent and coherent

Namespaces and infosets.

Namespaces and XML 2.0 (Was: XML 1.0 in flux)

Namespaces aside, absolutizing is none of _X_Path's business

namespaces include their name => 1-1

New text for Namespaces 2.0

no flexibility in using looser comparison in RFC 2557

No more tangents (Was: A proposed solution)

OID URN namespace....

on relative URI references

On, and on, and on...

On, and on, and on... was: Mechanism, not policy [was: Attribute uniqueness...]

Oops (was RE: A proposed solution)

Personal view

Philosphy 101

Private address spaces and URIs

PUBLIC/SYSTEM distinction (was Re: typo/bug in the namespace spec)

RDF/XML/Internet Collisons, Process (was Moving on)

Re Deprecate/Undefined (was Request for status dump and issues check)

Re Deprecate/Undefined (was Request for status dump andissues check)

Reasons to use namespaces

red/green XML

Rehash of literal-vs-relative argument status

rel:foo for those who can't do without 'relative' URIs

relative URIs and local lexical scopes: "Unique Base"?

Request for status dump and issues check

RFC 2557 (MHTML) uses byte-equality after absolutizing

some uses of relative URI as namespace names

Spinning off interesting heresies (was Re: How are semantics named?)

Standards vs. Recs (was RE: Divide the problem)

stepping backward

stepping backward (one more step)

Tar and feathers for me

Terminology

Thank you Dan

The "deprecate/fixed-base" option

The 'resource' identified by a namespace name URI should be the

The 'resource' identified by a namespace name URI should be the namespace

The Kesselman/Connoly proposal (was Re: Re Deprecate /Undefined )

The Kesselman/Connoly proposal (was Re: Re Deprecate/Undefined )

The tail shouldn't wag the dog

typo/bug in the namespace spec

typo/bug in the namespace spec? [was: Mechanism, not policy...]

Uncertainty on xml-dev

URIs quack like a duck

vocabularies was: Re: Can everyone be happy?

We need some function f

well-structured? was: RE: what "huge problem" with XML Base? [was: red/green XML]

what "huge problem" with XML Base? [was: red/green XML]

what about XPath? was: Can everyone be happy?

What would be cool... (CONNEG vs. discovery)

Who cares if URI1=URI2 (Was: URIs quack like a duck)

Why I moved from Forbid to Literal

Worth repeating

XML 1.0 in flux

XML Base and XPath absolutizing of URIs

YAMP: ns-attr is a _mark_, not a _name_ for the namespace

Yet Another Modest Proposal: [was] Minimum required of a system called "Namespaces in XML"

Last message date: Friday, 30 June 2000 19:18:59 UTC