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

Re: Poll: What should a namespace name be?

• To: uche.ogbuji@f...
• Subject: Re: Poll: What should a namespace name be?
• From: "James Cerra" <jc2astro@h...>
• Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 15:26:52 -0400
• Bcc:
• Cc: xml-dev@l...

>I didn't take this poll because it is not clear.  I think a URI should be
>syntactically a URI but semantically "only a string" (that "only makes me
>chuckle  ;-)  ").

If it doesn't bother anyone, should I change the option "Something like a 
URI, but not a URI" to "syntactically a URI, but semantically only a 
string?"  Would that change anyone's vote?

Also, any better options?  I'm willing to re-phrase the poll if it will 
generate more accurate data (although it is unscientific by definition).


>[1] Many people, esp. Joshua Allen, seem to talk about conventions of URLs 
>as
>if they include the vast body of Internet users.  I think this is a 
>fallacy.
>Most non-technical folks don't know of or care of URLs.  They don't type 
>into
>their browsers anything starting with "http://".  They also don't end with
>strings containing "/".  They either type in 
>"www.company-i-want-to-buy-from.co
>m", or they go to Yahoo and search, clicking based on the title.  Or they
>click on links from Web pages retrieved by either action, based on the text 
>of
>the link, not its href.

My father types the URL - sans the scheme prefix (ie "http://) - into the 
search engine and clicks "search."  Oh well... ;-)

---
Jimmy Cerra
"If the path is set in stone, use a sledgehammer"


_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com

• Prev by Date: Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
• Next by Date: Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
• Previous by thread: Re: Parser&DTD....
• Next by thread: Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread