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

RE: Resource Gloss (Human Readable)

• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• To: Jonathan Borden <jborden@m...>,Rick Jelliffe <ricko@a...>, xml-dev@x...
• Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2001 13:11:00 -0600

Actually, it provides a non-authoritative (so far) 
alternative as to what a namespace URI might resolve to 
if the user does not prefer a common practice 
of resolving it to an XML schema of some sort when one 
wants more than name disambiguation.  It isn't 
that is isn't useful, but let's be clear that so far, 
that is what draft RDDL is.   Resolving to a schema 
is clearly useful.

Otherwise, bag-o-link targets are what linkbases are 
and have always been:  a menu.  You only need it if 
you need to choose.   We should be leary of insisting 
on indirections.  I only object to the "ought".

Len 
http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard

Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h


-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Borden [mailto:jborden@m...]

    It does turn out that this does provide a solution for the otherwise
contensious and nasty problem of what a namespace URI ought resolve to.

• Prev by Date: Re: Resource Gloss (Human Readable)
• Next by Date: vb vs java and future with XML
• Previous by thread: RE: Any language to GUI from XML db?
• Next by thread: Re: Resource Gloss (Human Readable)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread