• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: URIs harmful (was RE: Article: Keeping pa cewith James Clark)
• From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@c...>
• Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 21:47:27 -0400
• References: <2C61CCE8A870D211A523080009B94E430752B6CF@HQ5>

[Bullard, Claude L (Len)]


> Obtuse.  The real world works as I have described it.  The
> fantasy world of URIs as unique ids of unique resources
> doesn't work as long as their is an HTTP in the morph and
> the syntax for naming and resolution are identical.
>

Yes, and I found out the hard way that some "Web Services" tookits will not
accept arbitrary URI schemes - had to stick with http: URLs.  I think I
recall that XML Spy did not like non-http: schemes for schema namespaces
either, but i am a bit hazy - put that at about 80% sure.  So you cannot in
actual practice try to evade the issue by using "uri:xxx:yyy" instead of
some non-responding http: URI, depending on what tools you work with.  Ugh.

Cheers,

Tom P

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: URIs harmful (was RE: Article: Keeping pa ce with James Clark)
    • From: "Michael Leditschke" <mike@a...>

• References:
  • RE: URIs harmful (was RE: Article: Keeping pa ce with James Clark)
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Schema Namespace name, schemaLocation,and Schema V ersioning
• Next by Date: Re: version numbers and infosets
• Previous by thread: RE: URIs harmful (was RE: Article: Keeping pa ce with James Clark)
• Next by thread: RE: URIs harmful (was RE: Article: Keeping pa ce with James Clark)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread