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: Wed, 17 May 2000 12:35:40 -0400
Message-ID: <3922CA5C.7DD09B8B@reutershealth.com>
To: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>, "xml-uri@w3.org" <xml-uri@w3.org>
Tim Berners-Lee wrote:

> On the contrary, there is a serious one: you get things which were
> (identical, not identical)
> when compared as strings turning out to generate (not identical, identical)
> objects when
> considered as URIs.  This seems to me to be untenable.

However, we do not (yet) have any Recommendations that insist on treating
namespace names as anything but strings.  There is still time to get it
right, for suitable values of "right".

> The XML specs have to go one way or the other: commitment to or separation
> from URIs.

Compromise positions are possible.  For example, one might:

	1) have two classes of namespace names, those which are syntactic
		absolute URIs and those which are not;
	2) define identity as string identity;
	3) say that non-URI names have no meaning outside the current document.


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 Wednesday, 17 May 2000 12:35:48 UTC

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