Cart
ASP Error: 70
Description: Permission denied
Source: Microsoft VBScript runtime error
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Begging the Question (the novel)
 I'm just jumping in here to make an observation that I think it is interesting that Uche "isn't interested in XML Schema", he just uses XML Namespaces, and Now Paul "isn't interested in RDF" he just wants XML Namespaces to remain holy (and to guard the golden dereferencing grail before it falls into the wrong hands). But I think everybody is missing a very important point that ALL OF THESE TECHNOLOGIES USE XML NAMESPACES. So of course the dereferencing issues are relevant across ANY TECHNOLOGY USING XML NAMESPACES. and that's why I feel, still, that we can't just hold some kind of a moritorium on "how an XML Namespace URI value can be used to dereference an actual document" Paul Tchistopolskii wrote: > Really - I don't see what is related to the original topic of this thread. > Are you talking about some RDF-based framework ? > > By the way, why you are talking about RDF ? There is no word > RDF in the namespaces doc, there is no sign that those URIs > will point to RDF e t.c. If you have discovered some way how to > use Namespaces with RDF - I don't understand how it is relevant. > document"..and then further clarify that "oh, it's ok for RDF, etc." <lossofcool> ALL OF THE W3C XML STANDARDS USE XML NAMESPACES. WHAT PART OF THAT DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND? ARE WE SUPPOSED TO ADD TO A LIST AT THE END OF THE NAMESPACE SPEC EVERY TIME A NEW VOCABULARY COMES OUT OF THE W3C THAT XML NAMESPACES APPLY TO? TAKE IT AS A GIVEN. YOU CAN COUNT ON IT. DONE DEAL. SURE THING. (JEEZ!) </lossofcool> This kind of attitude kinda frustrates me because it's really an outdated perspective to just "not care" about other technologies that aren't on your immediate radar in your own little corner of the web world (especially when they really are on radar and you are just not aware of it). The whole point of the semantic web (and actually the good old fashioned traditional web too) is to start connecting all this stuff together and to eventually create systems to facilitate these connections automatically. We didn't jump topics when we started talking about how RDF might dereference a document using XML Namespaces after the discussion about how XML Schema might do the same. We're still talking about connecting instances of data models to their validating schemas -- be it XML, RDF or whatever. It would be one thing if you guys were saying "I don't understand how XML Namespaces apply to these other technologies, let's all work together and figure this out" but what I'm hearing is "I only care about my little corner of the XML Namespace world -- to hell with everything else -- but don't you go implementing any of this stuff too successfully, too quickly or it's "no fair"...foul ball... All this schema stuff is so experimental, we really need a collaborative free-for-all for a while to figure out how to do things. Telling developers not to innovate until a standard materializes that might never actually materialize (and in fact has not even been started yet!) isn't gonna fly. This stuff has to work together to do anything useful. We're all in this together man :-) lisa 
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! 
Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||
