[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Namespace related-resource bundles: just the one?
- From: Uche Ogbuji <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: Miles Sabin <MSabin@interx.com>
- Date: Mon, 01 Jan 2001 09:53:39 -0700 (MST)
> As a consequence it looks as though we wouldn't be able to take
> an _existing_ document instance (which already references a
> resource bundle via it's namespace URI) and, for example,
> associate it with a different XML or RDF schema without
> negotiating with the controllers of the existing bundle URI.
Good point. I see this as an implementation issue once one of the
Namespace Catalogue specs gets adopted. I would suggest good old
processing instructions (remember those?)
<?namepace-resolution-redirect from="http://spam.com" to="http://myorg.com"?>
Pick whatever names for the target and the pseudo-attributes.
> What do people think? Is this a problem? If it is, how could the
> existing proposals be revised to avoid it?
Again, I think that the existing proposals govern the remote data format,
and that this should be separated from implementation within processors.
For instance, here are a couple of my current implementation ideas.
*) Add to 4XSLT an extension function,
That takes a namespace URI (perhaps the value of a namespace node) and
returns a node set of the div, link or whatever elements with the
*) Add a document class option in 4Suite Server to add the namespace
catalog resources to the RdfServer model (4SS allows automatic update of
an RDF model with various data from an XML document added to the repository,
including the result of evaluating given XPaths on the document).
Both scenarios could easily handle redirect processing instructions.
Uche Ogbuji Principal Consultant
email@example.com +1 303 583 9900 x 101
Fourthought, Inc. http://Fourthought.com
4735 East Walnut St, Ste. C, Boulder, CO 80301-2537, USA
Software-engineering, knowledge-management, XML, CORBA, Linux, Python