Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: "Sean B. Palmer" <email@example.com>
- To: "Simon St.Laurent" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com
- Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 15:17:32 +0000
> And just to make the point yet again, lest anyone think Henry's word is
> final word on this issue, option #4 remains controversial and weakly
> defined. Applications which expect to be able to dereference namespace
> URIs and find schemas should be prepared to be disappointed.
Except in the RDF world where processors use namespaces as the defualt for
looking uop any form of schema (RDF or XML). That is why I brought the issue
up: RDF namespaces should be RDF Schemas.
> I'd suggest that we start talking about a clearer definition of what a
> namespace is and what might 'live' there, but it seems to be one of those
> dangerous topics.
It's an essential topic to cover and *requires* discussing. If it's a
good/bad idea, lets hear people points of view, and come to some kind of
concensus. I know this is a topic that people feel very "strongly" about,
but that only backs up the assertion that it needs to be sorted out.
1. What is a namsespace: a name, an address, or both
2. Is it equivalent to an FPI
3. Shall we use namespaces for validation: it that a good idea
4. If so, what type of schema? Any schema that has some kind of generic XML
5. Should the Web depend on the DNS system for its integrity?
6. Who own's a namespace. What does a namespace mean if there is no hard
assertion for it?
A lot of this was discussed for "xml names", but look how far that
conversation got (relative URI's for namespaces deprecated).
Sean B. Palmer
"Perhaps, but let's not get bogged down in semantics."
- Homer J. Simpson, BABF07.