Re: [tm-pubsubj-comment] ISSUE ? Look at XML Namespaces

[Lars Marius Garshol <larsga@garshol.priv.no>]

* Lars Marius Garshol
|
| This is fine, except that you are using the wrong namespace URI. XTM
| has a namespace URI. If you'd used that the above would have
| imported just fine into the OKS.

* Thomas Bandholtz
| 
| As far as I understood, the final persistent namespace URI has not
| been settled yet. Did I miss something?

Unless we're misunderstanding one another you must have, because the
XTM namespace URI is most definitely fixed. See

  <URL: http://www.topicmaps.org/xtm/1.0/#xtmns >
 

* Lars Marius Garshol
|
| As far as I can tell, this boils down to a proposal that we extend
| the syntax of XTM so that you can use namespace prefixes to
| abbreviate URIs in xlink:href attributes in XTM documents. We could
| do that, of course, but what would be the point? It would just be an
| abbreviation mechanism, and there are actually some serious problems
| with it.
 
* Thomas Bandholtz
|
| You're right. This is not the most important issue. But it would
| demonstrate that we are aware of what XML namespaces mean.

It would also mean changing the XTM syntax, unfortunately. I am very
reluctant to do that, especially for something that has no clear
benefits and also technical problems. (It entails syntactical
ambiguity for URIs in attributes, and there is no general rule for how
to combine namespace URI and local name to produce a full URI.)

In any case, the PubSubj TC can't change the XTM syntax. ISO SC34 is
the body that maintains that specification.
 
* Lars Marius Garshol
|
| This sounds as though you are thinking that we will make an XML
| vocabulary for PSDs. So far the consensus has been that we don't
| need to, as HTML, XTM, and RDF/XML are already out there and fully
| able to do what we want to do.
 
* Thomas Bandholtz
|
| If we want a parser to process PSI just like XML namespaces this
| won't work.  W3C does not insist on *any* retrievable document
| behind a namespace URI, but if there is, this must be XML schema.

Where do they say that? The namespace specifications are silent on the
subject. 

| I am not sure about IATA. But all of these huge organisations don't
| have to provide anything but a namespace name, as the identifiers
| already exist and are well defined.

They do need to do a bit more than that, but not much, I agree. Let us
hope that our work can be the trigger that makes them do so.

-- 
Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian         <URL: http://www.ontopia.net >
ISO SC34/WG3, OASIS GeoLang TC        <URL: http://www.garshol.priv.no >