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

RE: DNS based URIs that don't imply access method

• To: "'xml-dev@l... '" <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: DNS based URIs that don't imply access method
• From: David Hunter <dhunter@v...>
• Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 09:44:56 -0700

[Sorry for the formatting of my posts; I'm on a web-based mail client today,
and am stuck with the "response before the mail" format...]

I can't say that "architectural conformance" is too strong an argument, yet.
I'm *willing* to be convinced of this point, but I'm not convinced yet.
(I'm tempted to ask "Is the web that strongly architected?", but I'm afraid
to, because I seem to recall *that* being discussed here ad nauseum as
well...)

So I'll ask this instead:  What is it about the "architecture of the web"
that would be broken, hampered, or less elegant, if we used something other
than URIs for namespace names?

-----Original Message-----
From: John Cowan
To: dhunter@v...
Cc: xml-dev@l...
Sent: 7/25/2002 11:57 AM
Subject: Re:  DNS based URIs that don't imply access method

David Hunter scripsit:

> So what are the other benefits of using URI for namespace names, that
I'm
> missing?

Architectural conformance.  When you want to name something on the Web,
you use a URI; that's one of the things that makes the Web.

> Do people have these kinds of problems with Java package names?

Probably not.  Maybe there should be an URN type for them?
There is already one for SGML/XML public identifiers.

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: DNS based URIs that don't imply access method
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: RE: DNS based URIs that don't imply access method
• Next by Date: Re: DNS based URIs that don't imply access method
• Previous by thread: RE: DNS based URIs that don't imply access method
• Next by thread: RE: DNS based URIs that don't imply access method
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread