Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Mike Champion <mc@x...> writes:
> 8/18/2002 3:38:14 AM, Francis Norton <francis@r...> wrote:
>
>
> >>I just think the acronym space is too heavily populated for it to be
> >>much use outside of very focussed groups to use lots of acronyms.
> >>
> >That's a fair point in general, but I don't think it applies once you've
> >already associated acronyms to a language via file suffixes and
> >namespace prefixes.
>
> This is a profound little conundrum we find ourselves in!
>
> The idea of an authority such as Microsoft, or IANA, or "general
> consensus" associating file suffixes to a particular meaning is
> considered a violation of the principles of the Web by the
> W3C leadership, and the namespaces spec was designed to to
> prevent such a thing by forcing prefixes to be mapped onto URIs.
> (or "URI-syntax globally unique strings", I don't wanna go there).
Another good reason for not pretending to 'bless' acronyms. I use xs:
and xsd: alternately as the namespace prefix for
http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema precisely for this reason, and
dislike the fact that I am pretty much stuck with .xsd as the file
suffix.
ht
--
Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
W3C Fellow 1999--2002, part-time member of W3C Team
2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@c...
URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
|
