OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   Re: simple question on namespaces. (more arguing)

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]
  • From: Jonathan Borden <jborden@mediaone.net>
  • To: Mike Brown <mbrown@corp.webb.net>, xml-dev@lists.xml.org
  • Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 16:54:38 -0500

Mike Brown wrote:

> Well there are many other examples of syntax rules for values that are
> supposed to be unique, and each ruleset is tailored for generating IDs
> suited for a certain purpose. For example, there are competing syntax
> for:
>    - the values of ID-type attributes in XML documents

These expand into URIs per the XPointer specification.

>    - Message-ID values in email headers

These are URIs using the mid: scheme

>    - language 'tags' like fr-CA and x-klingon

>    - the name or location of a resource -- a URI
> I do not see a good reason that URI syntax had to be the basis for
> identifying namespaces. It should not be a surprise that confusion ensues
> from this choice, since URIs were designed for a different purpose. They
> *not* generic identifiers; they are intended to be used to identify the
> names and locations of resources. Whether the location or resource exists
> and/or is accessible is irrelevant, as has been mentioned repeatedly. But
> that doesn't change the fact that the URI identifies a location. Come on,
> something so abstract as a namespace really a *resource* that can have a
> *location*?


A URI reference precisely identifies a location within the abstract URI
space. A namespace name is no more, nor less, abstract than a URI reference.

Jonathan Borden
The Open Healthcare Group


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS