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] Namespaces and URIs (was: A good case for Namespace URIs)

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

Sorry, I don't understand what you are saying.  What public ID?

Seairth Jacobs
SDML/GTP: http://www.seairth.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>
To: "'Seairth Jacobs'" <seairth@seairth.com>; "xml-dev"
Sent: Monday, March 04, 2002 2:07 PM
Subject: RE: [xml-dev] Namespaces and URIs (was: A good case for Namespace

> Just use the public ID.
> len
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Seairth Jacobs [mailto:seairth@seairth.com]
> Okay.  Once again, the issue of whether a URL used as a Namespace URI
> be resolvable or not has come up.  The main confusion here is that the URI
> given looks like a resolvable URL.  Most people would look at it and
> it to be able to resolve the URL to some sort of related document.  As
> with the govtalk URL though, this is not always the case. But, I can
> understand the reasoning behind the use of the URL format. It is a
> convenient and quick way to create a URI that is easy to remember and/or
> understand (I still don't understand URNs).
> However, as soon as the "http" scheme is mentioned, people start to assume
> it is a resolvable URL. So how about this... why don't we just come up
> a new scheme to use instead of "http".  For instance, we could have
> Then, when seeing "xmlns://www.govtalk.gov.uk/CR/core" or preferably
> "xmlns://govtalk.gov.uk/CR/core", we would know that the URL is not
> resolvable (at least using HTTP). At the same time, organizations can
> continue to use the URL format for its conveniences.


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

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