Comments on the architecture doc

• From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
• Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 21:30:30 -0800
• To: www-tag@w3.org
• Message-ID: <3C426CF6.2030901@textuality.com>

Two comments on the #Namespaces section:
(1) The relationship between languages & namespaces is I
     think still poorly understood.  The assertion that there
     is a 1-to-1 mapping is unproven.  This has a real-world
     application in the context of the recent communication from
     XMLProtocol - I don't think we're ready to write down the
     rules yet for the interaction between namespaces and
     media types.
(2) Quote: "The namespace document (with the namespace URI) is
     a place for the language publisher to keep definitive material
     about a namespace. Schema languages are ideal for this."
     I disagree quite strongly.  Schema languages as they exist
     today represent bundles of declarative syntactic constraints.
     This is a small subset of "definitive material".  RDDL (see
     https://www.rddl.org) represents my current thinking as to what
     a "namespace document" ought to be like.  Following the above
     quotation, the document goes on to say lots of things I agree
     with and which clearly stretch beyond the domain of schema
     languages.
The "#Hypertext Link Topology" section feels a little out of
date to me.  Having said that, I think the proper relationship
between RDF and the future of hypertext is something that still
needs lots of thinking and experience.
The above excepted, this all feels like valuable bootstrap
material.  -Tim

Received on Monday, 14 January 2002 00:30:06 UTC