• To: Jeff Lowery <jlowery@s...>, "'michael.h.kay@n...'" <michael.h.kay@n...>, 'Richard Tobin' <richard@c...>, "'xml-dev@l...'" <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: Namespace URI question
• From: Jeff Lowery <jlowery@s...>
• Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 17:21:02 -0800

Since I'm going to exasperate some of you with my loose terminology, let me
fix:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeff Lowery 

> So, though I would like to forget that these identifiers are 
> URI's, for reasons hinted at in [1], relative URI's were 
    ^^^^                                                                ^^^^

URI strings                                                        URI
strings

> deprecated.  Which got me wondering (and I wish I hadn't) 
> about the relativity of "/".  But since "/" means "localhost"...
> 
> Or does it really mean "127.0.0.1"? Uh-oh, I'm starting to 
> think that "localhost" ( or "/", or "127.0.0.1") could have 
> similar problems that relative URI's had when used as 
                                                         ^^^^
                                                         URI strings
> namespace identifiers. I'm sure the xml-uri folks must have 
> trampled this ground before.

There. Please don't get apoplectic on my account. 

• Prev by Date: RE: Namespace URI question
• Next by Date: Re: IE7 and browsers web standard compatibility
• Previous by thread: RE: Namespace URI question
• Next by thread: RE: Namespace URI question
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread