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

Re: The Tool X horror scenario (was RE: Begging the Question (thenovel)

• From: Paul Tchistopolskii <paul@q...>
• To: "Clark C. Evans" <cce@c...>, Mike.Champion@S...
• Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 14:13:18 -0800

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Clark C. Evans <cce@c...>


> On Sat, 30 Dec 2000 Mike.Champion@S... wrote:
> > So, the problem is NOT with the people who thoroughly understand namespaces
> > ... but with the people who think that namespaces look like URLs, and Tool X
> > treats them like URLs pointing to some sort of object, and then raise hell
> > with all the vendors whose tools do NOT treat namespaces like Tool X does.
> 
> Is this (above) the essence of the problem?  Since the spec is
> silent on this issue, it allows those vendors with very large 
> marketshare to create a de-facto interpretation of the specification
> which has in fact more weight than the spec itself?

Exactly. I've been saying that *this* and only this is my concern right from 
the beginning of the thread. I'm very happy that Mike wrote it in a good English
and in his style.

I'm soo happy this hook is now sound !

Of course,  it is a huge time bomb and this "DNS for XML" is a key 
component of  the semantics web, like current DNS is a key for the 
Internet. For some reason the namespaces specs allows this key 
component to be 100% proprietary but still 100% conformant to 
the XML specs!  

> Thank you Mike.

Yep. I sure like most of Mike's letters better than my own ;-)

Rgds.Paul.

• References:
  • Re: The Tool X horror scenario (was RE: Begging the Question (the novel)
    • From: "Clark C. Evans" <cce@c...>

• Prev by Date: Preparing to move on
• Next by Date: Re: What should a namespace URI point to?
• Previous by thread: Re: The Tool X horror scenario (was RE: Begging the Question (the novel)
• Next by thread: Preparing to move on
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread