Re: a couple more thoughts about ccpp.tx

At 10:06 01/02/99 -0500, Reynolds Franklin NRC/Boston wrote:
>
>I am confused (this, as you have probably noticed by now, is a typical
>state of affairs) about  CONNEG support for multiple namespaces. In
>
>
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-conneg-feature-reg-03.txt
>
>I read the following:
>
>   3.1.3 URI tree
>
[...]
>
>This seemed to me to be roughly equivalent to the XML namespace
>mechanisms.

I was alluding to that equivalence in the final sentence below:

  The conneg feature registration process is designed to allow a large
  namespace, with delegation through URI structures where needed.  (Though I
  must concede that this mitigates somewhat against the non-redundant
  vocabulary ideal.)  In a sense, I suppose this is an alternative approach
  to achieving multiple vocabularies.

In a sense, a namespace qualifier is a single additional level of naming
hierarchy.  But I was writing as if the concepts were quite distinct.

I really don't believe we are significantly at odds here;  just needing to
synchronize some terminology issues.

Does this clarify anything?

#g

------------
Graham Klyne
([email protected])