Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Thank you very much for your earlier response. I need to read and think for a bit. However, one quick comment given the thread on "Public Identifiers." <Todd> > >A further thought . . . to be manageable, it seems to me that this would > >require a registry of prefixes for the particular industry. Assuming a > >registry were possible, would namespaces and DTDs mix? </Todd> <SimonStLaurent> > They could, but I think some folks at the W3C would be aghast at the > suggestion that URIs weren't the right answer. </SimonStLaurent> It seems to me that URIs would be the right answer if there were a one-to-one relationship between URI and namespace prefixes, rather than a one-to-many relationship (i.e., unique prefixes via a fixed association with a URI). I have been thinking that it would also be nice if there were some requirement (perhaps an optional feature in parsers) that allowed one to fetch the schema/DTD at the end of the namespace URI. If there were at least a moral responsibity on the owner to keep the schema/DTD at the end of the URI the same (or tell people when it changed) (or a perhaps a responsibility on the user to hash/sign it, so you know if it has changed), then namespaces would be tied to a vocabulary that gave them meaning (now and in the future), rather than simply being a means of avoiding technical element collision. This is what I thought "semantic web" meant and was disappointed to find it didn't. Todd
|
