OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   Re: [xml-dev] Re: [namespaceDocument-8] 14 Theses

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

On 2002-02-19 12:09, "ext Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@microsoft.com> wrote:

>> But http: URLs and RDDL are not that final solution (even if
>> they will offer some needed, albeit limited, utility in the interim).
> It's interesting how arguments come full circle on this list. :)

I think this issue is a turbo powered carousel that has been
spinning for some time ;-)

> Of course, agreeing on this would require consensus instead of more
> pointless arguments about semantics and metaphysics. ;)

What else is there to argue about but semantics and metaphysics?
(all that other stuff is boring, eh? ;-)

But seriously...

We won't approach consensus until it is widely understood that

   Namespace URI != Vocabulary URI
   Namespace URI != Document Model URI
   Namespace URI != Software Component URI

   Namespace       N:N  Vocabulary
   Vocabulary      N:N  Document Model
   Document Model  N:N  Schema
   Document Model  N:N  Software Component

   URI >= 'http:' URL

The RDDL "philosophy", that a namespace is just a scope
of intersection for various resources, and a namespace
URI (not necessarily an http: URL) can be a useful point
of reference for organizing and providing access to a
bundle of information about those related resources (that
organizational information of course being a resource in
its own right) is right on track.

The remaining questions seem to be:

(a) Namespace URI denotes single resource vs. redirection bundle?

It seems most folks think the latter, with the former though
being more common for XML Schema.

(b) Manditory redirection if only single resource in bundle?

This is a consistency issue. Will trivial redirection help
simplify applications and general usage? Probably.

(c) Is RDDL the correct vehicle to define a redirection bundle?

For now, it appears to be reasonable, though it probably will be
subsumed by better solutions down the road.

(d) Do we have to use http: URLs as namespace URIs to make it work?

Until DDDS and SW technologies mature a bit more, probably yes, in
most contexts.

(e) Is it a long term solution?

Probably not, but it's a step in the right direction, it
will let us do something right now, and it will help us
explore and understand the remaining issues and challenges.


I think we're nearly there. A few tweaks to RDDL (such as
tighter integration with RDF or definition *as* RDF). A few
clarifications about the true nature of namespace URIs,
such as the N:N truths above. Some clearer integration of
DDDS and RDDL. And we're there, at least for now, until
we work out a better way...



Patrick Stickler              Phone: +358 50 483 9453
Senior Research Scientist     Fax:   +358 7180 35409
Nokia Research Center         Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.com


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS