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

Re: simple question on namespaces.

• From: Paul Tchistopolskii <paul@q...>
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2000 16:16:43 -0800

What particular place in that document answers to my question ?

The only sentence which seems relevant is :

<q>
[Definition:] The attribute's value, a URI reference, is the namespace name identifying
the namespace. The namespace name, to serve its intended purpose, should have the
characteristics of uniqueness and persistence. It is not a goal that it be directly usable
for retrieval of a schema (if any exists). An example of a syntax that is designed with
these goals in mind is that for Uniform Resource Names [RFC2141]. However, it should be
noted that ordinary URLs can be managed in such a way as to achieve these same goals.
</q>

Why namespace looks exactly like URL when it is in fact  not ?
Just to confuse people, right ?

I think that

xmlns:xsl="www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform"

Is better design than

xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform"

Rgds.Paul.

> See http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml-names/

> From: Paul Tchistopolskii [mailto:paul@q...]

> Why it is
> xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform"
>
> but not
> xmlns:xsl="www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform"
>
> Why something which is not a URL and was not
> supposed to be a URL ( right? )  looks like URL ?
>
> Rgds.Paul.

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: simple question on namespaces.
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
  • Re: simple question on namespaces.
    • From: "G. Ken Holman" <gkholman@C...>

• References:
  • RE: simple question on namespaces.
    • From: Andrew Layman <andrewl@m...>

• Prev by Date: DTDs vs Schemas
• Next by Date: Re: simple question on namespaces.
• Previous by thread: RE: simple question on namespaces.
• Next by thread: Re: simple question on namespaces.
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread