Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
John Cowan wrote: > Tim Bray scripsit: >>I think if I ever decided to edit this thing again, I would include >>something along the lines of Amy's language, that namespace names are >>strings which follow the syntactic rules for URI references, > > It's been pointed out that this is not quite enough: the whole point of > using URIs (namely the ability to use multiple authorities) depends on > the (static) semantics of URIs, not just their syntax. It's a semantic > rule that says "Only microsoft.com can allocate URIs with a microsoft.com > authority part." I don't buy it. The system will self-correct; if I start publishing namespace names in microsoft.com or reutershealth.org space, the results in general and interoperability in particular will be poor, so I won't do that. In fact, the current claim that NSnames *be* URI refs doesn't give you what you want, right? -Tim
|
