Re: A little courtesy, please

> Re: A little courtesy, please
 
> 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. 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.

What if we treat the namespace URI as a base on which other specs define
relative URLs to allow identification of specific resources, as the
default location.

Next we make the rule that a webserver should return some error if
an attempt is made to access this base URI as an absolute address.

In such a case, how can that directory be a "web resource" as such,
unless "web resource" has the vacuous meaning of "anything that can
have a syntactically correct URI"?   

URIs which are not directly retrievable and which some spec bans from
being directly accessed seem to fit in with the "web architecture"
but they are not locators of web resources and they don't identifier
a web resource.  


Rick Jelliffe

Received on Tuesday, 23 May 2000 12:34:25 UTC