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

Re: A little courtesy, please

From: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 12:36:37 +0100 (BST)
Message-Id: <200005231136.MAA18100@nag.co.uk>
To: connolly@w3.org
CC: xml-uri@w3.org

> Either namespaces are web resources in every sense of the word,
> and hence any sort of URI reference the author chooses
> may be used to point to them, or not.

Is a URI reference a web resource (the URI refererence itself, not the
resource it points at) ?

Can you give "any sort of URI reference" to a URI
reference? Namespace names are by definition URI references.

> and if not, the design
> of XML namespaces doesn't agree with web architecture, which
> is that important things should be treated as web resources
> with all the rights and obligations thereof.

I can't construe any meaning to this statement, it's clearer
when you stick to:

> I prefer to discuss these issues in black and white terms

> using test cases ala the two bats,

Which case admirably shows why the namespace names should be taken as
(as specified) the URI reference rather than the absolute URI. With your
proposed change to the namespace rec your document becomes some sort of
unstable underspecified non-document that can not in general be queried
or styled as the element names are underspecified.


> I largely agree with this, but I cannot agree that treating relative
> URI references as namespace names without absolutizing them is in
> the spirit of RDF.

what about other suggestions raised such as using uuid or mid URI
schemes, what happens to the validity of a mid: URI if you stick an
element name on the end a la RDF?


David
Received on Tuesday, 23 May 2000 07:37:38 UTC

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