which layer for URI processing?

At 01:00 PM 5/24/00 -0400, Tim Berners-Lee wrote:
>We disagree about which we would prefer. We are in the awkward
>situation that we have all arrived in a situation that the URI spec
>and the Namespace space are basically in conflict, which no one
>likes. We need to get out of that situation.
>
>[...]
>
>So, while  I would not brand you, Tim, as anti-URI, somehow
>we have to get a solution which is consistent with the URI spec.

'Consistent with the URI spec' and 'consistent with the use of URIs in
Namespaces in XML' - which is strictly as names - seem to be thoroughly
incompatible, at least from your viewpoint.  

I'd appreciate it if you could explain why you it is so critical that lower
layers of processing handle the considerable amount of effort involved in
treating URIs _as URIs_ rather than as strings for purposes of comparison,
and why higher layers (like RDF and other models) can't be trusted with
that responsibility.

In short, explain your side of:
SSL> I keep requesting that semantics be treated as a layer on top of syntax,
SSL> while you and Dan seem to be insisting that URI semantics be driven as
SSL> deeply into the syntax layer as possible.

Simon St.Laurent
XML Elements of Style / XML: A Primer, 2nd Ed.
Building XML Applications
Inside XML DTDs: Scientific and Technical
Cookies / Sharing Bandwidth
http://www.simonstl.com

Received on Wednesday, 24 May 2000 13:34:02 UTC