RE: URI intents? (was: RDDL: Negotiate out the Noise)
Er, I confess to not having read the RDDL spec all that carefully. Nonetheless, if I want a URI merely to identify my namespace, I shouldn't have to resolve to something first. It's only an identifier, existing unto itself. I have read the Namespaces rec, and this problem of overloading URIs occurred to me back then, as I read it. So it's not an RDDL problem, its the overloaded usage problem that's quite classic and always leads to trouble eventually. Hence, the long RDDL and namespace threads. URI mean too many (conflicting) things to too many people. > -----Original Message----- > From: Leigh Dodds [mailto:ldodds@i...] > Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 1:22 PM > To: Jeff Lowery; xml-dev@l... > Subject: RE: URI intents? (was: RDDL: Negotiate out > the Noise) > > > > It seems that the basic problem is not what URIs point too, > but that they > > are being overloaded (points to a web page, identifies a > namespace, points > > to resource definition, etc, etc.) > > > > Should URI's be extended to include intent? > > Isn't this what xlink:role and xlink:arcrole are already > providing? Hence > RDDL 'nature' and 'purpose'. > > Cheers, > > L. >
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