W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-uri@w3.org > May 2000

Re: Are *relative* URIs as namespace nemes considered harmful?

From: John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 15:01:38 -0400
Message-ID: <39219B12.58635EF0@reutershealth.com>
To: Jonathan Robie <Jonathan.Robie@SoftwareAG-USA.com>, "xml-uri@w3.org" <xml-uri@w3.org>
Jonathan Robie wrote:

> John, when would you *not* want expanded names to stay stable as the
> document is relocated? Are there convincing use cases where
> location-dependent names are what you want?

I suppose when you want a name that is truly private to this document,
and cannot collide with *any* existing name.

Note that I'm not arguing for any solution at this point, just trying to
clear away the underbrush.  This for two reasons: a) almost everybody has
an entrenched position here, and b) I'm the point man for the problem,
qua editor of the Infoset, which is the primary place where the eventual
decision will get expressed.


Schlingt dreifach einen Kreis um dies! || John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
Schliesst euer Aug vor heiliger Schau,  || http://www.reutershealth.com
Denn er genoss vom Honig-Tau,           || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
Und trank die Milch vom Paradies.            -- Coleridge (tr. Politzer)
Received on Tuesday, 16 May 2000 15:01:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:13:58 UTC