[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Michael Kay wrote:
> The XQuery specification, incidentally, defines a mapping of error QNames to
> error URIs. It's different from this one, of course.
The error URIs in the XQuery spec look like this:
http://www.w3.org/2004/10/xqt-errors#XPST0017
Something similar has been tried before in XML digital signatures and
RDF. For reasons elucidated in the draft proposal, this format is not
suitable for all QNames and does not work as a generic mechanism for
encoding Qnames as URIs.
The XQuery format also seem to suffer from the disease that everything
must be an http URI even when, as in this case, the URI is not actually
resolvable. (http://www.w3.org/2004/10/xqt-errors is a real page but the
fragment ID doesn't point to anything.)
I agree with most of your concerns about the details of the proposed
qname URN scheme (IRIs vs. URIs, percent encoding, etc.) but at a
fundamental level I think the proposed scheme is better than what XQuery
is proposing. I would suggest that XQuery adopt the new qname URN scheme
rather than using http URIs to identify error codes. In fact, I'll cc
this to the XQuery working group to register it as a formal comment.
--
Elliotte Rusty Harold elharo@metalab.unc.edu
XML in a Nutshell 3rd Edition Just Published!
http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/xian3/
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0596007647/cafeaulaitA/ref=nosim
|
