[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Jonathan Borden wrote:
> A URI is simply a name for a thing, whatever that thing may be. A name is
> not the thing that it names, just as the string "Alaric Snell" is not you.
> The concept of names was not invented yesterday, nor in 1991. The
> relationship between names and the things they name has been formally worked
> out in various logics etc. for centuries.
Yes, but this relationship has been used by human being used to deal
with a certain level of ambiguity and our applications would be easier
to develop if this ambiguity was removed.
A superficial look at various specifications makes me feel worried that
it might not always be the case even between W3C specifications :=) !
If we take "http://example.org/my-namespace.xml#foo"; for instance...
For XPointer, this is the XML element which ID is "foo".
For RDF, this can be element which type (ie name) is "foo" in namespace
"http://example.org/my-namespace.xml";.
For W3C XML Schema, the QName equivalent (ex:foo) is (depending on the
context) the element, the global attribute, the simple or complex type,
the element group AND the attribute group named "foo" for the target
namespace "http://example.org/my-namespace.xml";.
This doesn't help to understand what
"http://example.org/my-namespace.xml#foo"; might be identifying :=) !
Eric
PS: of course, if http://example.org/my-namespace.xml is a RDDL
document, http://example.org/my-namespace.xml#foo might contain a
documentation of what it really means...
--
Rendez-vous a Paris pour mes formations XML/XSLT.
http://dyomedea.com/formation/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric van der Vlist http://xmlfr.org http://dyomedea.com
http://xsltunit.org http://4xt.org http://examplotron.org
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
