RE: Namespace name: better to use URN or URL?

[Nicolas LEHUEN <nicolas.lehuen@ubicco.com>]

The BIG advantage of URLs is that it ought to be more difficult to have two
companies spawn two identical namespaces name (is that correct, namespace
name ?).

Regards,
Nicolas

>-----Message d'origine-----
>De : Roger L. Costello [mailto:costello@mitre.org]
>Envoye : jeudi 30 aout 2001 14:22
>A : xml-dev@lists.xml.org
>Objet : Namespace name: better to use URN or URL?
>
>
>Hi Folks,
>
>Is there any advantage to formulating a namespace name as a URN, vice
>formulating it as a URL?
>
>Example:
>
>    urn:publishing:book
>
>versus
>
>    http://www.publishing.com/book
>
>As I see it, 
>
>- the advantage of formulating a namespace name as a URN is that it's
>easier to conceptualize a URN as a "name" and not a "location". 
>
>- the advantage of formulating a namespace name as a URL is that the
>namespace "could" then have a dual purpose - it could serve both as a
>name and as a location to "something".  I am ashamedly 
>ignorant of RDDL,
>but I vaguely recall reading something about using a namespace URL to
>point to a RDDL document.  Does RDDL enter into this issue?  
>
>My impression is,
>
>A couple years ago there was a general feeling in the XML 
>community that
>URNs were the preferred form for namespace names, but recently there
>seems to be a shift towards preferring URLs.  Do you agree?
>/Roger
>
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
>initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
>
>The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
>manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
>