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

RE: Illegal Characters in Namespace URIs

• To: "Mark Baker" <distobj@a...>,"Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@g...>
• Subject: RE: Illegal Characters in Namespace URIs
• From: "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@g...>
• Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 18:43:36 +0200
• Cc: <xml-dev@l...>
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <20020617124906.B10966@w...>

Correct. I didn't want to imply anything else.

IMHO, RFC2396 should not try to workaround the error made in RFC2518, but
that's just my point of view, it seems.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Baker [mailto:distobj@a...]
> Sent: Monday, June 17, 2002 6:49 PM
> To: Julian Reschke
> Cc: xml-dev@l...
> Subject: Re:  Illegal Characters in Namespace URIs
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2002 at 08:48:11AM +0200, Julian Reschke wrote:
> > Not so. The reason WebDAV "gets away" with the badly chosen
> namespace name is the fact that RFC2396+ is going to allow empty
> scheme-specific parts, making "just the scheme name" a valid URI.
> At least that's my understanding of the outcome of the discussion.
>
> "RFC 2396+" is likely going to allow empty scheme-specific parts
> *because* WebDAV made a boo-boo, not the other way around. 8-)
>
> MB
> --
> Mark Baker, CTO, Idokorro Mobile (formerly Planetfred)
> Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.               distobj@a...
> http://www.markbaker.ca        http://www.idokorro.com
>

• References:
  • Re: Illegal Characters in Namespace URIs
    • From: Mark Baker <distobj@a...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Illegal Characters in Namespace URIs
• Next by Date: Re: Re: [dsdl-comment] Re: Re: Re: DSDL: use
• Previous by thread: Re: Illegal Characters in Namespace URIs
• Next by thread: RE: User interface programming XUL?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread