Signature/Properties QName issue

[<Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>]

Trevor

No, I think that the value for the Properties Identifier should be a URI.

The tag finding is pretty clear that QNames were intended to be used for attribute and element names, but that pragmatically they are used for some values as well. Regardless, using them for values can introduce complexities to parsers and canonicalization.
It is for this reason that I suggest changing this value to be a URI.

The additional length of the string should not matter given the overall verbosity of XML, and the meaning of a QName still requires resolving the prefix to URL for human understanding as well.

I also note that the tag document also states:
"In so far as the identification mechanism of the Web is the URI and QNames are not URIs, it is a mistake to use a QName for identification when a URI would serve equally well."

Am I missing a reason for retaining use of  a QName in this context?

regards, Frederick

Frederick Hirsch
Nokia