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

URIs (was Re: WD for Namespaces 1.1)

• To: Ronald Bourret <rpbourret@r...>
• Subject: URIs (was Re: WD for Namespaces 1.1)
• From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Date: 05 Apr 2002 11:05:13 -0500
• Cc: xml-dev <xml-dev@l...>
• In-reply-to: <3CACEBBE.79A546B0@r...>
• References: <2C61CCE8A870D211A523080009B94E4306FEEAE2@HQ5><1017946755.11733.61.camel@l...> <3CACEBBE.79A546B0@r...>

On Thu, 2002-04-04 at 19:11, Ronald Bourret wrote: 
> Namespaces were (and still are) a good idea. Using URLs as example URIs
> in the namespaces spec was a bad idea. It led people to think about
> dereferencing namespace names which, if you think about it, is about as
> odd as dereferencing Java package names. Sure, you can come up with a
> mechanism to do it, but why would you want to?

Perhaps Sun was wiser simply because they DIDN'T use URIs as their
identifiers, and thereby avoided all this controversy.

Alas, we're stuck.
 
-- 
Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: URIs (was Re: WD for Namespaces 1.1)
    • From: Mark Baker <distobj@a...>

• References:
  • RE: WD for Namespaces 1.1
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
  • RE: WD for Namespaces 1.1
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: WD for Namespaces 1.1
    • From: Ronald Bourret <rpbourret@r...>

• Prev by Date: RE: WD for Namespaces 1.1
• Next by Date: Re: WD for Namespaces 1.1
• Previous by thread: Re: WD for Namespaces 1.1
• Next by thread: Re: URIs (was Re: WD for Namespaces 1.1)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread