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

Re: more QName madness

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: more QName madness
• From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 16:11:20 -0500
• In-reply-to: <200211161922.OAA04641@m...>

jcowan@r... (John Cowan) writes:
>I think no one would object to this solution with the exception of
>IANA, which would have the job of actually maintaining the registry. 
>IANA is overworked and underfunded.

I'm not convinced that the problem is large enough to require IANA
activity.  MIME Media Type registrations already go through IANA, and
have associated RFCs which define fragment identifiers.  In some sense,
the IETF already has this problem well-covered for most cases.

The only case in which that process may not be sufficient is for the
core application/xml set (currently registered via RFC 3023), and even
for that, I don't believe that we're talking about a large number of
schemes.

If you can come up with more than 20 plausible generic XML schemes, I'll
consider that there might be a problem.  I've written 5 and can think of
2 or 3 more (text-matching, regex matching, and an external parsed
entities bit like the xinclude1() scheme).

If we can demonstrate that this is a real problem and IANA's only
constraint is funding or personnel, I'll be happy to put my money or
time where my mouth is.


-------------
Simon St.Laurent - SSL is my TLA
http://simonstl.com may be my URI
http://monasticxml.org may be my ascetic URI
urn:oid:1.3.6.1.4.1.6320 is another possibility altogether

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: more QName madness
    • From: "Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@o...>

• References:
  • Re: more QName madness
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>

• Prev by Date: Re: QNames ain't URIs (was QName madness)
• Next by Date: Re: RDF and the new releases
• Previous by thread: Re: more QName madness
• Next by thread: Re: more QName madness
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread