[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Overloaded URIs (was Re: XLink: behavior must go!)

• From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
• To: XML List <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 12:52:05 -0500

James Tauber wrote:
> 
> 1. Namespace URIs don't have to point to anything retrievable, they are just
> unique identifiers
> 2. Some URI schemes might not be web-retrievable (eg "isbn:1-23456-789-0")
> 3. Some URI schemes *are* web-retrievable (eg http://www.megginson.com/ns/)
> 4. So namespaces URIs *can* point to something, though, such as a
> human-readable description of the namespace, if they use a URI scheme that
> is web-retrievable.

It strikes me as clearly poor design to use an HTTP url for something not
retrievable by the HTTP protocol. I am distressed that this is becoming
"standard practice." How the heck are we supposed to know, on seeing a URI
whether it is supposed to be retrievable or not?

-- 
 Paul Prescod  - ISOGEN Consulting Engineer speaking for only himself
 http://itrc.uwaterloo.ca/~papresco

Alabama's constitution is 100 years old, 300 pages long and has more than
600 amendments. Highlights include "Amendment 393: Amendment of Amendment
No.  351", "Validation of Laws Regulating Court Costs in Randolph County",
"Miscegenation laws", "Bingo Games in Russell County", "Suppression
of dueling".  - http://www.legislature.state.al.us/ALISHome.html

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• References:
  • Re: Overloaded URIs (was Re: XLink: behavior must go!)
    • From: "James Tauber" <jtauber@j...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Lotsa laughs
• Next by Date: RE: Standards: they're de-jure, they're de-facto, they're de-LOVELY!
• Previous by thread: Re: Overloaded URIs (was Re: XLink: behavior must go!)
• Next by thread: Re: Overloaded URIs (was Re: XLink: behavior must go!)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread