xml-dev - Re: Schema at XML namespace URI to change

["Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@simonstl.com>]

At 02:22 PM 10/23/00 +0800, Rick JELLIFFE wrote:
>If this idea proves useful, it may be good to document it. But then
>there would
>be the danger of premature standardization. Despite the strong opinions
>of many people about namespace issues, I think most people also know
>that 
>we are still gathering data and figuring out what approaches actually
>work.

I'm arguing precisely that using it as a convention (and an unlabeled one,
at that) at the W3C _is_ premature standardization, and worse, premature
standardization without due consideration.

>I think this convention from W3C represents welcome progress in
>sophistication
>for the use of namespaces.

While I would welcome 'progress in sophistication for the use of
namespaces', I cannot welcome this experiment.  It is:

1) Underdocumented - it wasn't at all clear from Henry's original message
that "Content negotiation!" is a factor, and the mess of URLs he provided
certainly didn't clarify that.

2) Controversial - while there appear to be some folks at the W3C driving
for a connection between namespace URIs and schema URIs at any cost, this
approach didn't exactly receive a warm welcome on xml-uri@w3.org a mere six
months ago.

3) Relies on scarcely-implemented technology - The content-negotiation RFCs
have just emerged from a long process of development, but I can't say I've
seen implementations appearing widely.  Add to that the bad browser habit
of being generous in what they accept (*/*), and I don't think you have an
infrastructure worthy of anything more than EXPERIMENTS BOLDLY LABELED AS
EXPERIMENTS.

I'll be happy to consider the rest of your contentions if and when this
convention and associated processing are described in a formal process with
wider scope than the XML Schema Working Group voting to improve approaches
initially implemented by W3C staff.

I find it disappointing how little interest the W3C appears to have in its
own processes and process rules on a regular basis.  It's difficult to take
advantage of the few opportunities provided by the W3C for public input
when it doesn't release timely drafts (3 months is the rule), leaves
controversial large-scale issues in the hands of a group focused on one
small-scale issue, and can't seem to sort out whether its work is
experimental research or the standards-based foundation for the next Web.

Simon St.Laurent
XML Elements of Style / XML: A Primer, 2nd Ed.
XHTML: Migrating Toward XML
http://www.simonstl.com - XML essays and books