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

[David Megginson <david@megginson.com>]

[removed CC's]

David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk> writes:

> One would have assumed though that a later REC would supersede any
> comments in an early NOTE. The description of namespace that you
> quote there may have been the intention at the time (and clearly is
> what you wish namespaces had become) but it is nothing like the
> concept of namespace defined in the namespace rec.

Agreed.  

Unfortunately, due probably to political considerations that seemed
more important at the time, the Namespaces REC does contain enough
weasel wording that you can get away with pointing a Namespace URI
directly at a schema without violating the strict letter of the spec.

That's the same kind of thing the U.S. Congress does with laws, but
then, they have a Supreme Court to clarify things (i.e. finish writing
politically-sensitive laws) and the W3C hasn't.


All the best,


David

-- 
David Megginson                 david@megginson.com
           http://www.megginson.com/

***************************************************************************
This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers.
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@xml.org&BODY=unsubscribe%20xml-dev
List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
***************************************************************************