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

Re: Namespace and URIs

• To: ext Paul Prescod <paul@p...>, "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Subject: Re: Namespace and URIs
• From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@n...>
• Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2002 16:17:41 +0200
• Cc: XML DEV <xml-dev@l...>, WWW TAG <www-tag@w...>
• In-reply-to: <3C703844.1C606413@p...>
• User-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/10.0.0.1309

On 2002-02-18 1:09, "ext Paul Prescod" <paul@p...> wrote:


> The RDDL view is that they DO have identity, meaning and structure and
> can thus have schemas and stylesheets associated with them.

Well, it's one thing to say tht they have meaning or structure and can
have resources associated with them, but it's another thing to equate
them to specific vocabularies, document models, schemas, etc. which in
all fairness are individual resources in their own right independent
from any namespace.

> If namespaces are NOT things with identity and internal structure (i.e.
> they are just punctuation) then we should never have used URIs to refer
> to them. 

Not necessarily. It's useful for namespaces to be mnemmonic. It's useful
for namespaces to inherit the global uniqueness characteristics of URIs.

I have no problems with using URIs to denote namespaces, only with
URLs being used for namespaces ;-)

Patrick

--
               
Patrick Stickler              Phone: +358 50 483 9453
Senior Research Scientist     Fax:   +358 7180 35409
Nokia Research Center         Email: patrick.stickler@n...

• References:
  • Namespace and URIs
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Re: Why REST was Re: URIs are simply names
• Next by Date: Re: 14 Theses around "Namespace Documents"
• Previous by thread: Re: Namespace and URIs
• Next by thread: Re: URIs are simply names was: Re:"Abstract"URIs
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread