- From: Simon St.Laurent <simonstl@simonstl.com>
- Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 18:34:28 -0400
- To: <xml-uri@w3.org>
The more I think about relative namespace URIs, the more alarmed I become. I already noted the simple case of moving (or copying) documents from one place to another, and the namespace URIs getting broken. In cases where documents are generated - especially if they are generated from fragments of XML - it may well make sense to have multiple output URIs for different types of output. These multiple output URIs may not even be 'aware of each other' - users may think they're entering information into a small system, which they see results from, when in fact their information is much more widely distributed though mechanisms (even simple regulatory reporting) of which they aren't aware. Relative URIs that worked so well in one context may cause problems in another context, as part of a slightly different document type building on the same XML-based information. I see all kinds of red lights flashing on my shining new XML repository already, and it's a black box that's not even plugged in right now. Beyond single-user situations (where users have perfect memories, at that), it looks to me like relative URIs are pernicious. There are risks even without generated content, and generating content seems even more endangered. Simon St.Laurent XML Elements of Style / XML: A Primer, 2nd Ed. Building XML Applications Inside XML DTDs: Scientific and Technical Cookies / Sharing Bandwidth http://www.simonstl.com
Received on Monday, 15 May 2000 18:32:37 UTC