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

Re: Use cases

From: John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 11:25:15 -0400
Message-ID: <3929515B.F591B4F0@reutershealth.com>
To: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>, "xml-uri@w3.org" <xml-uri@w3.org>
David Carlisle wrote:

> Namespaces are defined to be URI references, with an explicit
> character-for-character equality test.

Actually, it is namespace *names* that are defined to be URI references.
But this does not affect your argument.

> rfc 2396 does _not_ assert that the relative URI references.
> ./foo and foo are equal.  In fact they are not equal as URI references
> note the plural, reference_s_.
> What rfc 2396 establishes is the mechanism to get from a URI reference
> (and a base URI) to the absolute URI.
> This mechanism _does_ involve removing the ./ but to say that two URI
> references that (given a base URI) always refer to the same URI
> is just like saying two pointers that point to the same thing are
> always the same pointer which normally speaking is false.

I think this argument is a very strong one.  Namespace names are defined
to be URI references, not URIs, not resources. 

Namespaces may be resources or not; the Namespec doesn't say.


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 Monday, 22 May 2000 11:25:54 UTC

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