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

Re: Namespaces and namespace names: a new synthesis?

From: Simon St.Laurent <simonstl@simonstl.com>
Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 17:34:11 -0400
Message-Id: <200005292132.RAA10619@hesketh.net>
To: xml-uri@w3.org
At 05:29 PM 5/29/00 -0400, John Cowan wrote:
>> What is the resource nature of a namespace?
>
>X is a resource iff:  1) X has an identity function (clouds are out,e.g.)
>and 2) there is an URI that identifies X.

I still don't see where this necessarily conflicts with the name nature of
a namespace, nor (especially) why this should be given priority over the
name nature of a namespace, which was the explicit project of the spec.

Developers who choose to use names that are ambiguous (aka relative) may
not be able to take advantage of this 'resource nature'.  Why is that so hard?


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 Monday, 29 May 2000 17:32:10 UTC

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