RE: RDDL for names (was Re: XML Schema built-in data typenamespaceURI.)

[Jonathan Borden <jborden@mediaone.net>]

W. E. Perry wrote:
>
> It appears that my perspective is radically different from the
> premises which
> permit this conclusion. To us (or at least to me) as XML
> developers, the spec
> citation given is not the _only_ nexus of these two expressions
> of data type,
> and it is one of the less interesting. If we instantiate a data
> instance which
> describes its type by one URL reference in precisely the same form for
> processing as we instantiate a different instance which describes
> its type by
> the other URL reference, how are the types of those instances not
> equivalent?

I think this follows directly from the natures of resources as defined in
RFC 2396 and the distinction between a resource which is named by a URI, and
the network entity which results from the resolution of a particular URI at
a particular point in time. A type is a resource not its associated network
entity.

Henry is stating that the normative prose in the XML Schema spec makes such
assertions about the datatypes (my paraphrasing).


> And if the spec citation alleged to be their only nexus did not
> exist, how would
> that change their equivalence, either in concept or in the
> immediate semantics
> of their processing?
>

I'm having trouble parsing this. Please explain.

-Jonathan