namespace issues still

[Stephen Green <stephen.green@documentengineeringservices.com>]

Quoting http://docs.oasis-open.org/specGuidelines/namingGuidelines/resourceNaming.html#NamespaceDesign

"HTTP scheme namespace URIs must be rooted at the
"docs.oasis-open.org" Internet domain using one of the following two
patterns with the /ns/ path element, unless an alternative URI is
approved by the TC Administration: (1)
http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/<ShortName>/<Versioned-NS-String> OR (2)
http://docs.oasis-open.org/<ShortName>/ns/<Versioned-NS-String>.
ShortName is the approved short name for the TC or Member Section;
Versioned-NS-String is a short string identifying a namespace using a
versioning subcomponent. For example, given an imaginary TC short name
'ws-xx' and a versioned namespace string element 'WS-XX-20080115', a
NS URI would be: http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/ws-xx/WS-XX-20080115 OR
http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-xx/ns/WS-XX-20080115.";

I note "unless an alternative URI is approved by the TC
Administration" and by 'TC Administration' I take it it
means the OASIS staff, rather than TAG TC.

The pattern which for us would therefore be

http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/tag/<Versioned-NS-String>

(where there are no slashes in '<Versioned-NS-String>'
so that seems to make our existing namespace one
requiring special TC Admin approval).

This would mean we need something like

http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/tag/tag-20100129

The trouble is, to change the namespace I need to change
the guidelines too (since they include the example markup).
I don't know if we can assume the approval date will be
20100129 and it seems likely it could be sometime in Feb.
On one hand the date needs to be able to reflect the precise
committee draft (in case there is a further committee draft
for version 1.0 requiring a change of namespace). On the other,
I can't leave the namespace to the last minute after approval
because the namespace needs to be changed in various
places besides the titles (e.g. in the example in the guidelines
and in the schema embedded in the markup spec). So my
preference, which I think is within our scope of TC discretion,
is to use a less precise date, just enough to pinpoint a
uniques comittee draft. Because we might approve in Feb
(could we time it to do so) more easily than limiting it to Jan
I'd prefer Feb as a month of approval in case we need a
second ballot or the ballot is delayed.

i.e.
http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/tag/tag-201002

I'd kind of prefer to replace the second 'tag' with 'taml' but
I'm not sure how much scope the TC has to do this so, unless
assured by Admin http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/tag/taml-201002
would be OK, I'll use

http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/tag/tag-201002

just to be on the safe side.

It looks like I'll need to create a new set of documents. Sorry.

Best regards

Steve
---
Stephen D Green