Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: Lisa Rein <email@example.com>
- To: Paul Tchistopolskii <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 11:38:44 -0800
Paul Tchistopolskii wrote:
> I don't understand. I'm not saying that URIs
> should be URLs. I'm saying that namespcae URIs
> should never be dereferenced.
So you're saying the the namespace URIs shouldn't be allowed to be used
to connect to XML Schemas to XML documents? Only the dedicated elements
and attributes that can also serve this purpose?
Should that functionality be removed from the XML Schema spec then?
(i don't think that's very likely...)
Perhaps I'm just not following you...
True, as each of the evil empires (there are several and I'm not naming
names) decides to implement their URI dereferencing scheme we will all
just have to deal with all of them, because they will each have an
instant implementation base.
However, I doubt that disallowing its use it until we come across the
"best" way to do it is going to help anything. The W3C is having a hard
enough time getting all these core specs out without quibbling over what
ultimately amount to implementation details (which W3C specs are
supposed to stay clear of, in theory).
If you have an innovative method that you feel is better than ToolX's
hypothetical method, by all means, tell everyone about it, and then
maybe you can be the de-facto standard (and get bought out by ToolX,