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

RE: peace and quiet

From: Simon St.Laurent <simonstl@simonstl.com>
Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 23:32:42 -0400
Message-Id: <200005240330.XAA02848@hesketh.net>
To: <xml-uri@w3.org>
At 10:33 PM 5/23/00 -0400, Jonathan Borden wrote:
>Thanks for the nice summary. After careful consideration, and my initial
>inkling that absolutization was the way to go, I now conclude that the
>current namespace spec is correct and that namespace URIs ***including
>relative URIs*** ought be compared literally (char-by-char).
>This is most consistent with other URI usage where 'path' normalization is
>done at the server's discression though the URIs themselves are not
>'identical' e.g.
>http://www.x.com/a/./b/c and http://www.x.com/a/b/c are not identical URIs
>though resolve to the same content/document on most servers.
>Usage of relative URIs will have the well identified pitfalls. So be it. You
>makes your choices you gets your consequences.

I started out thinking that relative URI references were evil creatures
that should be disallowed entirely in namespaces, but wind up at a similar
position: compare namespace URI references (including relative ones)
literally, char-by-char, and let higher levels handle absolutization when

Relative URI references need warning labels, but I think that can be
handled as best practices rather than specs.

Simon St.Laurent
XML Elements of Style / XML: A Primer, 2nd Ed.
Building XML Applications
Inside XML DTDs: Scientific and Technical
Cookies / Sharing Bandwidth
Received on Tuesday, 23 May 2000 23:30:50 UTC

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