- From: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
- Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 13:43:59 -0500
- To: xml-dev@xml.org, xml-uri@w3.org
At 12:06 PM 2000-05-26 -0400, Paul W. Abrahams wrote: >David Brownell wrote: > >> The "XML Namespaces" specification is quite clear that the >> purpose of a namespace "Universal Resource IDENTIFIER" is >> identification, not location. >> >> Were the purpose of those namespace URIs to be location >> (as in: dereference to get a schema) then the spec would >> have used a "Universal Resource LOCATOR". >> >> URIs are very fit for the purpose of identification. And >> that's the task/purpose identified in the namespace spec. >> >> There's a clear line between identifying something ("my auto, >> which has been stolen" -- it's got a Vehicle IDENTIFICATION >> number [VIN] too!) and locating it. > >There's a difference between a VIN and a namespace name. A VIN identifies a >particular object such as your car. A namespace name need not be associated >with any object, real or virtual, at all. The problem with URIs is that >they're overloaded with an irrelevant significance, namely, identifying >resources. Any unique identifier would serve the purpose, and one with no >connotations would serve it better. > >But I agree with your main point, which is that the purpose of namespace names >is not to locate anything. > [I am sorry for the tone of my last outburst.] Identifying and locating have a life-cycle which is a genuine cycle. Each feeds on the other. The actual problem here is that Tim sees an abstract thingie like a namespace as appropriate to include within the range of possible values of 'resource' and you are assuming that a 'resource' is some particular object. A view which may be close to what is driving Tim is that the fact that <quote> a collection of [entity type and attribute] names have been set aside, so that multiple instances of XML syntax may share processing by identifying parts of their infosets with these names </quote>, is a beneficial capability, a resource. The identification of the [element type and attribute] names as posessed of a relationship with certain classes or methods of proper processing constitutes the resource. A schema or other dialect definition document or [open] collection [specified by a query] of writings which collectively add knowledge about the proper processing of the corpus of XML instances using these names is an articulation or encoding of the resource; not the resource per se. A namespace can't "not be a resource," if it is of any use at all. Al
Received on Friday, 26 May 2000 14:05:06 UTC