My comment on the geo-oasis namespace URI

["Alessandro Triglia" <sandro@oss.com>]

Rex,

This is a clarification in response to your question on my comment about the
geo-oasis namespace URI (now issue #532).

My comment says that the namespace URI is "incorrect".  By that, I did not
mean that it is syntactically incorrect, but that it does not comply with
the OASIS rules for the creation of namespace URIs [1].  The URI in question
is:

	http://www.oasis-open.org/oasis/10

Given that in many other cases, URNs have been chosen by the EM TC as
namespace URIs (e.g., "urn:oasis:names:tc:emergency:EDXL:RM:1.0:........",
it is not clear why the above form has been chosen for the geo-oasis
namespace URI.

Also note the following statement in [1]:

"URIs intended for use as HTTP scheme URI namespace names should be formally
identified by the TC (as early in the specification design process as
possible) so that the OASIS TC Administration may check for possible naming
collisions, approve the proposed resolution target resource [namespace
document], and properly reserve the URI - including possibly reservation of
(all) space below the hierarchical level of the candidate NS URI".

Has the above been done?

Note also issue #562, which says that the geo-oasis schema needs to be
published as part of an (OASIS) standard--either in the EDXL-RM standard
itself, or in any other (OASIS) standard.  Otherwise, EDXL-RM cannot make
normative use of it.

Alessandro


----------------

[1]:
http://docs.oasis-open.org/specGuidelines/namingGuidelines/resourceNamingCom
mentaryV07.html#NamespaceDesign