Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
The BIG advantage of URLs is that it ought to be more difficult to have two companies spawn two identical namespaces name (is that correct, namespace name ?). Regards, Nicolas >-----Message d'origine----- >De : Roger L. Costello [mailto:costello@m...] >Envoye : jeudi 30 aout 2001 14:22 >A : xml-dev@l... >Objet : Namespace name: better to use URN or URL? > > >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 > > >----------------------------------------------------------------- >The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an >initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> > >The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ > >To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription >manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl> >
|
