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: Fri, 19 May 2000 11:09:38 -0400
Message-ID: <39255932.621C3E22@reutershealth.com>
To: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>, "xml-uri@w3.org" <xml-uri@w3.org>
Tim Berners-Lee wrote:
 
> I don't see that you gain anything by this over just banning relative URIs.

What you gain, *sigh*, is victory over the Moral Problem, which you seem to
insist on treating as negligible.  You partition namespace names
into two forms, Absolute URI (with optional fragment-id) and Other String.
Other String names are legal, but deprecated; they are not allowed to play
in the Brave New Namespace URI World.

Users who have created documents with Other String namespaces still get to
do everything the (1998) Namespace Rec allowed, however, namely compare
them for equality.  They are *not* left to twist slowly, slowly in the wind.

-- 

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 Friday, 19 May 2000 11:09:50 UTC

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