[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
Tim Bray wrote: > > 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, and that > making them dereferencable may be a good and useful practice but MUST > not be necessary for the base use case of disambiguation. -Tim > First of all, RFC 2396 doesn't define any real semantics for a URI reference, in any formal sense of the term "semantics" yet it does define a somewhat proper syntax, so I'm not sure that such a statement would really be saying anything e.g. a URI reference *is* a string that follows the syntactic rules for URI references. Such wordgames are never help anything. That might just create the situation in which a URI that is a namespace name identifies a namespace, but also identifies _another_ unrelated resource. And suppose you were to use this 'string' (that really isn't a URI reference) _as_ a URI reference, and try to resolve it. What would happen? What if it resolved to a document that said <i>This isn't a namespace, ha ha!</p> The point is that URIs _are_ names, and if you intend to use a URI (or URI reference) as a name, you are in fact using the string that is a URI reference as a URI reference. Let's just call a URI reference a URI reference. Jonathan
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|