[Dev] Proposal: simplify parcel XML namespaces

[Lisa Dusseault]

On Jun 27, 2005, at 11:08 AM, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
>
> At this point, the basis for Bryan's -1 vote can be bypassed by 
> allowing the old http://osafoundation.org/parcels/ syntax as a 
> backward-compatible alternative.  Bryan's objection was that it would 
> be ''introducing the potential for conflict (however unlikely) with 
> someone else who arbitrarily breaks the same rule and picks 
> "parcel:"''.  So, if this exceedingly unlikely conflict did in fact 
> occur, then the affected person could switch to using the old 
> http://osafoundation.org/ form and nullify the conflict.
>
To avoid conflict, wouldn't a 3rd-party instead use a URI of the form 
"http://www.mydomain.com/whatever", with whatever their registered 
domain is?  Or are you saying somebody working on one of the shipping 
product schemas (one of us or a volunteer on the main codebase) would 
use the HTTP scheme?

If we use XML namespaces, I am not sure we can restrict the types of 
namespaces used.  Since any URI is legal, a 3rd-party developer could 
put "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:foo" (which does use a legal scheme ) or 
even "mailto:dev at mydomain.com".  We can lead by example, is all...

Lisa