URLs and URNs

From: Tim Bray [mailto:tbray@textuality.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2000 12:53 PM

> If
> a namespace name is really a URI, then the namespace defined by 
> 
>   http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace
>   http://w3.org/XML/1998/namespace
>   http://18.29.1.22/XML/1998/namespace
> 
> really ought to be the same vocabulary.  Those are the same resources.
> We've had trouble explaining that namespace names are 
> syntactically URIs 
> but aren't guaranteed to point to anything.  If we shift 
> gears and say that
> "yes they *are* URIs", then the task of explaining how different URIs
> for the same resource can be different namespace names seems just as 
> nasty.  

Given this, and given the fact that the Namespace rec treats namespace names
as strings, and not URIs, could someone (preferably in the know) explain why
the Namespace rec uses URIs at all, and doesn't specify URNs must be used
for namespace names?  What was the reasoning for allowing URLs to be used as
namespace names?

I don't want to spark a side debate on URLs vs. URNs for namespace names,
but I think the working group's intent in allowing URLs may be important to
this discussion.

David Hunter
MobileQ
david.hunter@mobileq.com
http://www.mobileq.com

Received on Wednesday, 17 May 2000 14:21:31 UTC