[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Resource Gloss (Human Readable)
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: Jonathan Borden <email@example.com>,Rick Jelliffe <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com
- Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2001 13:11:00 -0600
Actually, it provides a non-authoritative (so far)
alternative as to what a namespace URI might resolve to
if the user does not prefer a common practice
of resolving it to an XML schema of some sort when one
wants more than name disambiguation. It isn't
that is isn't useful, but let's be clear that so far,
that is what draft RDDL is. Resolving to a schema
is clearly useful.
Otherwise, bag-o-link targets are what linkbases are
and have always been: a menu. You only need it if
you need to choose. We should be leary of insisting
on indirections. I only object to the "ought".
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
From: Jonathan Borden [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
It does turn out that this does provide a solution for the otherwise
contensious and nasty problem of what a namespace URI ought resolve to.