[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [dita] Ramifications of changing an existing namespace
Hi, Mary.
Just to clarify your position, the namespace:
What are the practical implications of your position?
- May remain buried in the spec
- May not appear on the cover page
- May not resolve to a namespace document.
Best,
- May our coverpage NOT include a namespace?
- May CD 03 NOT include a namespace document?
Kris
Kristen James Eberlein
Principal consultant, Eberlein Consulting
Secretary, OASIS DITA Technical Committee
Charter member, OASIS DITA Adoption Committee
www.eberleinconsulting.com+1 919 682-2290; kriseberlein (skype)
On 6/25/2010 4:46 PM, Mary McRae wrote:Hi everyone,
Sorry for the delay in getting back to you - the past few days have been very hectic.
With regard to the namespace issue. While the TC chose to declare an http namespace rather than the prescribed urn namespace in accordance with RFC 3121 (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3121) at the time, but chose not to declare it on the cover page of either the 1.0 or 1.1 version of the DITA specification which therefore resulted in many TC members not being aware that a namespace even existed (see http://docs.oasis-open.org/dita/v1.1/OS/archspec.pdf and http://docs.oasis-open.org/dita/v1.1/OS/langspec/ditaref-type.html) or for staff to correct the erroneous construction, and since we have never created nor intend to create a dita.oasis-open.org subdomain to support resolution of such a namespace, the namespace: may remain buried in the spec, may not appear on the cover page, and may not resolve to a namespace document.
Regards,
Mary
On Jun 25, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Don Day wrote:
I need to understand where we can move on this issue, Mary. Are you saying that we can't publish and continue to use our existing namespace? The DITA TC's namespace policy is that we are NOT going to break our backwards compatibility promise to our TC constituents and the wider community of adopters worldwide. That is why I am looking for clear approval on the namespace document as submitted so that the DITA 1.2 CD can proceed to Public Review.
--
"Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge?Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?"--T.S. Eliot
Mary McRae wrote:Hi Kristen,
That isn't OASIS Policy; just sample language used by several TCs. It's up to each TC to decide what their namespace policy is.
Mary
On Jun 23, 2010, at 3:10 PM, Kristen James Eberlein wrote:
I'd also argue that to change our existing namespace would be contrary to the spirit of OASIS policy.
If you look at the template for the OASIS namespace document (http://docs.oasis-open.org/templates/namespace.html), you see that it clearly states (emphasis added):
"It is the intent ... that the namespace URI will not change arbitrarily with each subsequent revision of the corresponding WSDL or XML Schema documents but rather change only when a subsequent revision, published in conjunction with a Committee Draft, results in non-backwardly compatible changes from a previously published Committee Draft."
Changing the DITA namespace just to confirm with the most recent OASIS conventions -- at the expense of breaking backward compatibility with DITA 1.0 and DITA 1.1 -- strikes me as exceedingly arbitrary and in opposition to the principles actually espoused in the DITA namespace template.
Best, Kris Kristen James Eberlein Principal consultant, Eberlein Consulting Secretary, OASIS DITA Technical Committee Charter member, OASIS DITA Adoption Committee www.eberleinconsulting.com <http://www.eberleinconsulting.com/> +1 919 682-2290; kriseberlein (skype)
On 6/23/2010 2:36 PM, Eliot Kimber wrote:The namespace cannot be changed because of backward compatibility requirements in DITA 1.x. That is, if the namespace were changed, all existing DITA documents and document types would be broken. Not to mention software that uses the namespace name in some way (such as to recognize DITA documents, which is it's purpose). Cheers, Eliot On 6/23/10 7:26 AM, "Kristen James Eberlein" <kris@eberleinconsulting.com> wrote:Hi, Mary and others. The namespace http://dita.oasis-open.org/architecture/2005/ is officially part of the OASIS DITA 1.0 and OASIS DITA 1.1 specifications. See the following topics in the specifications: * http://docs.oasis-open.org/dita/v1.1/OS/langspec/langref/topic.html * http://docs.oasis-open.org/dita/v1.0/langspec/topic.html Can someone clearly and thoroughly explain just what the ramifications would be if we were to change this to align with OASIS's namespace policies? Best, Kris Kristen James Eberlein Principal consultant, Eberlein Consulting Secretary, OASIS DITA Technical Committee Charter member, OASIS DITA Adoption Committee www.eberleinconsulting.com <http://www.eberleinconsulting.com/> +1 919 682-2290; kriseberlein (skype) On 6/23/2010 7:56 AM, Mary McRae wrote:The namespace http://dita.oasis-open.org/architecture/2005/ is not allowed. We do use a redirect of sorts to deliver the namespace document at the namespace location, but dita.oasis-open.org <http://dita.oasis-open.org> is not allowed. Regards, Mary On Jun 23, 2010, at 3:45 AM, Don Day wrote:Is it possible to set a redirect for the location http://dita.oasis-open.org/architecture/2005/ that simply goes to the preferred OASIS hosting address? That would seem to be the easiest way forward and avoids the current case of a 404 return message, which fits my definition of "the principle of astonishment" that standards usually try to avoid! ;-) -- Don Day Grosso, Paul wrote:Mary, We aren't communicating. I don't know what "it" isn't the issue for you. I don't know what it means for a namespace to be at a location. The DITA namespace name is http://dita.oasis-open.org/architecture/2005/. That is unchangeable. When someone puts a namespace name into a browser, they are supposed to be served a namespace document. That is a recommendation of the W3C Technical Advisory Group headed by Tim Berners-Lee. I don't not want to see OASIS violate this, and I would hope you and the other people who make OASIS policy [isn't that supposed to be the OASIS members, i.e., us] would not want to violate this either. So something needs to be served when http://dita.oasis-open.org/architecture/2005/ is accessed. The easiest way to do that is to put something at http://dita.oasis-open.org/architecture/2005/index.htm. That something can either be the namespace document or a document that redirects to a copy of the namespace document. paul From: Mary McRae [mailto:mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org] Sent: Tuesday, 2010 June 22 21:28 To: Grosso, Paul Cc: Kristen James Eberlein; DITA TC Subject: Re: [dita] Re: DITA 1.2, CD 02 submission (DITA1.2-CD02.zip) uploaded Hi Paul, No, that's not the issue. OASIS requires all namespaces to live at http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/dita/... or http://docs.oasis-open.org/dita/ns. If a namespace was declared prior to the naming guidelines going into effect (which created the explicit 'ns' in the path) then it must be at http://docs.oasis-open.org/dita/... It can't be at dita.oasis-open.org <http://dita.oasis-open.org/> . Mary On Jun 21, 2010, at 11:49 PM, Grosso, Paul wrote: Re: The namespace must live on http://docs.oasis-open.org/dita - it cannot live at the site of the focus area. I assume by "namespace" you mean the namespace document. The namespace name is http://dita.oasis-open.org/architecture/2005/ Since the namespace document has to be returned when one accesses the namespace name, the namespace document (or perhaps a redirect to it) has to reside at http://dita.oasis-open.org/architecture/2005/index.htm. paul
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]