[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [emix] Re: reference and use of GML artifacts [Re:http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/EMIX-477]
An interesting parallel to consider is schema namespaces themselves. In the IETF they are mere text. The URN format that we are using in ws-calendar, for example, is useless for discovering an artifact. Two guys got together and thought this was bad. They worried about this. They thought maybe namespaces should point at something, maybe a web page telling you about the specification. Then they thought, “Well.--can we make that web page machine readable as well?” They met for a while and started RDDL, a consensus set of XHTML semantic extensions. This labor of love got half baked, but good enough to use. Everyone began using it. I *think* they dropped it there, good enough, half specified, not properly “standardized”, and used by everyone, including this TC. "It is the theory that decides what can be observed." - Albert Einstein
From: Gerald Gray [mailto:gerald.gray@guiding-principle.com] I would like to echo this. By way of example, both the IEC 61968-100 CD (which covers JMS and web services integration for CIM) and various MultiSpeak schemas, the namespace does not point to any specific artifact or resource. From: Toby Considine [mailto:tobyconsidine@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Toby Considine |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]