- From: Clark C. Evans <cce@clarkevans.com>
- Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 15:39:19 -0400 (EDT)
- To: David Carlisle <david@dcarlisle.demon.co.uk>
- cc: abrahams@acm.org, vdv@dyomedea.com, xml-uri@w3.org
On Fri, 26 May 2000, David Carlisle wrote:
> On Fri, 26 May 2000, Paul W. Abrahams wrote:
> > And what do you think of the idea that led to this query:
> > using UUID's as the only non-deprecated form of namespace name?
>
> <stylesheet xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform"/>
> <stylesheet xmlns="uuid:ae36ff938865"/>
>
> I think the first one (even with the unfortunate four digits) is
> rather more useful informing a human reader
On Sat, 27 May 2000, Eric van der Vlist wrote:
> The Java guys have been wise with their path based on reverse DN...
> It gets the uniqueness from the domain name and is different enough to
> avoid trying to reference the address.
> If we had to find anew notation, why couldn't we use a similar one ?
I really like Paul Abraham's suggestion of deprechating all URI
schemes with the exception of "uuid" or something similar.
However, I like Eric's suggested replacement better.
<stylesheet xmlns="pkg:org.w3.1999.XSL.Transform" />
Received on Saturday, 27 May 2000 15:35:35 UTC