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 15:59:48 -0400
Message-ID: <3921A8B4.8E5BA3EA@reutershealth.com>
To: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@simonstl.com>, "xml-uri@w3.org" <xml-uri@w3.org>
"Simon St.Laurent" wrote:

> >Should
> >we stick to our commitments, or say that they were in error because
> >in conflict with our basic vision?
> 
> It's not been made clear here what precisely those 'commitments' were, or
> what the basic vision is.

The "commitment" is that when the W3C said in its Namespaces Rec that
matching was strictly char-by-char, they meant it, and people are
entitled to create documents that rely on it.

The "vision" is that everything on the Web, including namespaces, is named by URIs,
and that the same rules for URI-reference interpretation apply to all
resources.

The root of the trouble, IMHO, is that the problem is essentially
moral/aesthetic, not technical at all. 

-- 

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 16:00:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:32:42 UTC