• From: David Brownell <david-b@p...>
• To: David Hunter <david.hunter@m...>, xml-dev@l...
• Date: Mon, 03 Sep 2001 21:18:28 -0700

>     in my philosophy, a URN provides a better fit, 

In the sense that today nobody "expects" URNs to be used to
locate entities (it's a rarity) the way they do with URLs.

 
> (The point has also been made that it's easier to create a unique URL than a
> unique URN, but I'm not convinced that that's true.)

Well, the UUID scheme would seem to contradict that.  "uuidgen.exe"
on Win32 generates UUIDs, as I recall, and the prefix "urn:uuid:" turns
one nicely into a URN ... you're safe in most cases from reusing UUIDs
that you generate like that.

- Dave

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

• Prev by Date: RE: Really Understood W3C Schema Complex Types?
• Next by Date: Re: Namespace name: better to use URN or URL?
• Previous by thread: RE: Namespace name: better to use URN or URL?
• Next by thread: Re: Namespace name: better to use URN or URL?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread