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

Re: Are *relative* URIs as namespace nemes considered harmful?

From: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 18:21:25 +0100 (BST)
Message-Id: <200005221721.SAA04020@nag.co.uk>
To: timbl@w3.org
CC: xml-uri@w3.org

> It is inconsistent.  What do you do with documents on different http servers
> which each refer to "foo"?  What do you do with a documents
> which refers to "foo" and "./foo" in the same document? Here treating
> them as URIs and as strings give opposite results.  You just can't do that.

The current namespace spec is perfectly consistent.
Namespace names are URI references.

foo and ./foo are two namespace names, they are two URI references.
They refer to the same URI when combined with the base URI of the
document.

but this is not inconsistent, and to a user the effect is exactly the
same as:

http://www.example.com/foo and HTTP://www.example.com/foo are two
namespace names, they are two URI, if used as a URI to retrieve a
resource, they return the same resource.


The `collision' happens technically at a different point but 
there is no inconsistency in either case and I fail to see how you can
be happy to accept the second example but have such strong philosophical 
objection to the first.

David
Received on Monday, 22 May 2000 13:22:04 UTC

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