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

Re: Inclusions and other gotchas (was:Re: inclusion)

From: Eve L. Maler <Eve.Maler@east.sun.com>
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 16:44:42 -0400
Message-Id: <4.3.1.2.20000526155346.00cbdee0@abnaki.East.Sun.Com>
To: xml-uri@w3.org
Trying to dredge up my memory of the original namespace work...  If I 
recall correctly:

At 03:06 PM 5/25/00 -0400, Paul W. Abrahams wrote:
>I think all of the problems with namespace names stems from their use of URI's
>(whatever those are <s>) for a purpose other than the one they were 
>intended to
>serve, namely, identifying resources.

We discussed using FPIs and the like, but were told that the only 
acceptable choice was to use URIs because they identify resources, and a 
namespace is a resource.  We put the "unique and persistent" wording in 
there to try and counteract the fact that many URIs don't have these 
properties.

...
>1. Create a new scheme explicitly for the purpose of providing unique 
>namespace
>identifiers.   Or maybe an existing one will work -- I don't know.   But
>deprecate the use of URL for that purpose, be they relative or 
>absolute.   That
>would not break the namespace spec and would avoid the misleading connotation
>that URL have.

We were told that it's a no-no to use restrict the list of valid URI 
schemes; it was all or nothing.  So inventing a new one might be a good 
idea, but apparently we still wouldn't be allowed to say "You must use 
{fpi:|data:|whatever...}".

         Eve
--
Eve Maler                                    +1 781 442 3190
Sun Microsystems XML Technology Center    elm @ east.sun.com
Received on Friday, 26 May 2000 16:44:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:32:43 UTC