[XML-SIG] SAX 2.0, again

THOMAS PASSIN tpassin@idsonline.com
Sun, 27 Feb 2000 12:20:24 -0500

<uche.ogbuji@fourthought.com> wrote

<snip qty="most"/>

> > BTW, "uri" doesn't actually need to be a uri, any unique string will do.
> Actually, it does have to be a URI or it is in contradiction of the spec
> (although they didn't go the natural step to make URI conformance a formal
> namespace constraint, they do have pretty conclusive wording to that
effect in
> section 1).
Actually I mis-spoke slightly.  I really meant it doesn't have to look like
a regular ***URL***.  I was thinking that the "scheme" of a URI could be
blank, but checking the RFC I see it has to have at least one letter plus
the ":".  The rest of it can just be a string (modulo using legal
characters. etc).  The namespace spec specifically says
"It is not a goal that it be directly usable for retrieval of a schema (if
any exists). "  So it doesn't have to be any existing URL or even an
existing scheme, as long as it is unique.


Tom Passin