• From: "Roger L. Costello" <costello@m...>
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:22:14 -0400

Hi Folks,

Is there any advantage to formulating a namespace name as a URN, vice
formulating it as a URL?

Example:

    urn:publishing:book

versus

    http://www.publishing.com/book

As I see it, 

- the advantage of formulating a namespace name as a URN is that it's
easier to conceptualize a URN as a "name" and not a "location". 

- the advantage of formulating a namespace name as a URL is that the
namespace "could" then have a dual purpose - it could serve both as a
name and as a location to "something".  I am ashamedly ignorant of RDDL,
but I vaguely recall reading something about using a namespace URL to
point to a RDDL document.  Does RDDL enter into this issue?  

My impression is,

A couple years ago there was a general feeling in the XML community that
URNs were the preferred form for namespace names, but recently there
seems to be a shift towards preferring URLs.  Do you agree?
/Roger

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Namespace name: better to use URN or URL?
    • From: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Enlightenment via avoiding the T-word
• Next by Date: Re: Namespace name: better to use URN or URL?
• Previous by thread: Re: wanting advice on finding out the root element in a w3c schema
• Next by thread: Re: Namespace name: better to use URN or URL?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread