[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
> From: J.Pietschmann [mailto:j3322ptm@yahoo.de]
> > xmlns:foo="file:///foodom.xsd"
> Not quite correct.
> The relevant RFC is
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2396.txt
> (unless it has been obsoleted by a newer one recently.
> Your URL is an absolute URL.
Okay. So the above is an absolute file URL to nowhere.
>> Meaning its an absolute path,
>> relative to the root-of-the-moment.
> I have no idea what this should mean.
It means I misunderstood the meaning of the URI.
> In any case, it is unusual and perhaps unwise to use a file URL
> to indentify a name space. While the spec is fuzzy enough to allow
> basically arbitrary Unicode strings, the rationale for choosing
> URIs is to uniquely identify the name space, i.e. to provide a
> string unique in the whole universe. Using HTTP URLs comes
> reasonably close to this intention.
Yep, I agree. The example I chose did not originate from me, and my
arguments for not doing this were the same as yours. But I was a bit
confused on the interpretation of file:///file.ext URI format. I see it now
as a rootless file URL, and therefore meaningless. I doesn't appear to be
officially deprecated for namespace usage, although it perhaps should be. I
can certainly see a lazy programmer using this for a short identifier, but
unwise URIs similar to this may be too to numerous to enumerate for
deprecation.
|
