xml-uri@w3.org from May 2000 by subject

a few open questions

A little courtesy, please

A little courtesy, please (resource questions)

A minor point about xmlns=""

A new proposal (was: Re: which layer for URI processing?)

A proposal

A simple (hopfully not stupid) question

A thought about relative URI comparison

after 570 messages...

are 'cid' URLs relative?

Are *relative* URIs as namespace names considered harmful?

Are *relative* URIs as namespace nemes considered harmful

Are *relative* URIs as namespace nemes considered harmful?

are many URIs ultimately relative? was RE: are 'cid' URLs relative?

Asking the right questions: namespace documents

Attribute uniqueness test: a (more) radical proposal

Attribute uniqueness test: a radical proposal

AW: Are *relative* URIs as namespace nemes considered harmful?

AW: When are two URIs equivalent?

Call the question!

Chaos, Process

Comments on straw poll

credit due

Database example; was: Why are relative NS identifiers used?

Defaule base URI for files

Dereferencability was: URIs as namespaces

Dictionares in the library

Dictionaries in the library

Documents without a base URI

Empty URIs

eXtensible Programming Language

Fwd: Irony heaped on irony

Fwd: Persistent caches - was: Are *relative* URIs as namespace nemes considered harmful?

Going the other direction by removing URI language from spec?

Having your strings and identity too....

Ignore that - Re: Attribute uniqueness test: a radical proposal

inclusion

Inclusion loops

Inclusions and other gotchas (was:Re: inclusion)

Injective Quality (Was: Re: URIs quack like a duck)

Irony heaped on irony

Irony heaped on irony (packaging and schemas)

ISBNs quacking

J. Clark on Bats

Joining/leaving xml-URI@w3.org

layering issues (was which layer for URI processing)

looking for packaging, not a schema

looking for packaging, not a schema (-NOT, counterproposal)

mid: (was RE: Irony heaped on irony)

Moving on (was Re: URIs quack like a duck)

Multiple paths to a namespace URI

Name services was: Persistent caches - was: ...

Namespace Identifier: The Hook

Namespace names and URIs

Namespace names: a modification of a semi-serious proposal

Namespace names: a semi-serious proposal

Namespace names: modified semi-serious proposal

Namespace URI schemes

Namespace-by-retrieval is consistent and coherent

Namespaces and namespace names: a new synthesis?

namespaces as[?] resources

Need for a Unified spec? Further XPath & Namespace Divergance

non-canonical XMLNS resources

Not-So-Pretty Staged Plan

Not-So-Pretty Staged Plan (fwd)

NS 1.1 ??? (was RE: Use cases)

oral tradition

Ownership of namespaces (was: Problems I cannot get past with using relative URIs for identity.)

Ownership of namespaces Re: Ownership of namespaces

peace and quiet

Persistent caches -

Persistent caches - was: Are *relative* URIs as namespace nem es considered harmful?

Persistent caches - was: Are *relative* URIs as namespace nemes considered harmful?

please limit nested inclusion of previous messages?

Previous XML-DEV namespace discussions

Problems I cannot get past with using relative URIs for identity.

PUBLIC v. SYSTEM not URI v. FPI

RDF and XML

RDF namespace conventions

RDF, URIs, XML

RDF/XML/Internet Collisons, Process (was Moving on)

Relative URIs were never intended as a namespace name.

Relative-URI allowed only-if <xml:base> is explicitly provided.

Remember: namespaces break DTD's

RFC 2396

Rules for absolutizing: was Re: Are *relative* URIs as namespace nemes considered harmful?

schemas and namespaces

SIgh [was: Irony heaped on irony]

Spirits of RDF and URI

status quo

Swamped (Was:Re: Call the question!)

Syntax and semantics

Terminology: `absolutization' is vile

Terminology: `absolutization' is vile (\ideal)

Terminology: `absolutization' is vile, but nothing else is better

The "data:" URI scheme considered helpful

the case of two bats

The Moral Problem stated (was: Use cases)

The questions and their relationship

The trouble with absolutizing...

Theory and practice of URIs and Namespace names

Thoughts from an external observer

Toward the self-describing web [was: Irony heaped on irony]

Updating RFC2396 (Was:Re: URI versus URI Reference)

URI versus URI Reference

URIs as namespaces

URIs don't force behavior [was: Why are relative NS identifiers used?]

URIs quack like a duck

URLs and URNs

URLs for Namespaces: I don't buy it

Use cases

Verbal summary of diagram (use case for XML module semantics)

W3C XML "Coordination" Hassle

Web Architecture, 'XML Autonomy'

Welcome to the XML-URI list

What the namespace spec should say (was: Re: Irony heaped on irony)

What's [in] a resource?

When are 2 URI's the same?

When are two URIs equivalent?

where's the beef?

Where's the bone of contention? (small clarification)

which layer for URI processing?

Why are relative NS identifiers used?

XML semantics was: Web Architecture, 'XML Autonomy'

xmlmd:foo

Last message date: Wednesday, 31 May 2000 18:13:54 UTC