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

Re: XML Schema built-in data type namespace URI.

  • From: Jonathan Borden <jborden@m...>
  • To: "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@c...>
  • Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2001 13:51:16 -0500

uri xml
Henry S. Thompson wrote:

> Jonathan Borden <jborden@m...> writes:

> >
> > A big problem here is that QNames and URIs are not being used in a web
> > interoperable or meaningful way. Are you saying that the concept
> > "unsignedInt" as named by
> >
> > http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema#unsignedInt
> >
> > is different than the concept "unsignedInt" as named by:
> >
> > http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema-datatypes#unsignedInt
>
> You're crossing threads, Jonathan.  Paul was answering a much simpler
> questions.
>
> In any case, yes, those two are different, because they are just URI
> references to elements in two distinct XML documents.  Prose in the
> XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes public working draft makes clear that
> these refer to the same builtin simple type definition, but that's in
> the prose, not something which follows from the nature of namespaces.
>

The resource is the concept "unsignedInt" -- it is useful to refer to this
using a single URI - pick either of the two above.

There is a disconnect between the prose and usage of namespaces and URIs. It
is simplest to use a single namespace and to provide single well-known URIs
for each datatype, regardless of the application that is intended to use the
datatype or URI that identifies the datatype.

I do think it is critical that the W3C identify a single mapping between
QNames and URI references and that this mapping be used in a consistent
fashion across all W3C recommendations. If this isn't done, and quickly,
then as the next generation of recs are built on the current generation of
recs, I fear chaos will ensue.

I consider a QName a shorthand for a URI reference and if I'm using an RDF
application I may wish to refer to something using a QName whereas with an
XLink application an expanded URI reference is more appropriate -- I want
this to be merely a syntactic convention and not have any "meaning" beyond
that.

-Jonathan



PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!

Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!

Buy Stylus Studio Now

Download The World's Best XML IDE!

Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!

Don't miss another message! Subscribe to this list today.
Email
First Name
Last Name
Company
Subscribe in XML format
RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3
 

Stylus Studio has published XML-DEV in RSS and ATOM formats, enabling users to easily subcribe to the list from their preferred news reader application.


Stylus Studio Sponsored Links are added links designed to provide related and additional information to the visitors of this website. they were not included by the author in the initial post. To view the content without the Sponsor Links please click here.

Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member
Stylus Studio® and DataDirect XQuery ™are products from DataDirect Technologies, is a registered trademark of Progress Software Corporation, in the U.S. and other countries. © 2004-2013 All Rights Reserved.