OASIS Darwin Information Typing Architecture (DITA) TC

 View Only

Re: [dita] Proposal for DITA namespaces

  • 1.  Re: [dita] Proposal for DITA namespaces

    Posted 07-19-2004 20:30
     MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    dita message

    [Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


    Subject: Re: [dita] Proposal for DITA namespaces


    Though it's true that RFC 3121 defines a URN namespace for OASIS, 
    Norm (the author of said RFC) has changed his mind on this.  See:
    http://norman.walsh.name/2004/03/03/266NorthPleasant which Norm 
    wrote after the W3C TAG's Web Architecture document at
    http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/
    came out in favor of resolvable URIs for namespace names.  Norm
    now suggests using http: URIs for namespace names.
    
    DocBook NG uses http://docbook.org/docbook-ng .
    
    DocBook V5 will probably use something analogous. 
    
    paul
    
    At 16:19 2004-07-16 -0400, Eric Sirois wrote:
    
    >Here is quick note to formally introduce and start some discussions
    >regarding namespaces for DITA XML Schemas.
    >
    >As per the RFC 3121(A URN Namespace for OASIS) [1] from IETF below you will
    >find some of the namespace that
    >could be applied to DITA XML Schemas.
    >
    >Here is a snippet the RCF that is of interest to the TC:
    >The RCF general structure for Technical Committee is the following:
    >Technical Committee Work Products
    >
    >         The "tc" hierarchy is for work products of OASIS Technical
    >         Committees.  The general structure of the NSS in the tc
    >         hierarchy has the form:
    >
    >            urn:oasis:names:tc:{tc-id}:{type}{:subtype}?:{document-id}
    >
    >         where "tc-id" is a unique identifier for the Technical
    >         Committee, and the remaining fields are assigned as per the
    >         specification hierarchy.
    >
    >Namespace suggestions:
    >Here are two namespaces that Eliot has been using for his modified version
    >the XML Schemas for his application xiruss-t
    >map - urn:oasis:names:tc:dita:map
    >ditabase - urn:oasis:names:tc:dita:base
    >I believe in this case that the four base XML Schema all have the same
    >namespaces.
    >
    >Below is a list of namespaces that could apply to topic, task, concept, and
    >reference.
    >topic - urn:oasis:names:tc:dita:topic
    >task - urn:oasis:names:tc:dita:task
    >concept  - urn:oasis:names:tc:dita:concept
    >reference - urn:oasis:names:tc:dita:reference
    >
    >Domains could have their own namespaces (as part of Method 2 - see below).
    >highlight-domain - urn:oasis:names:tc:dita:highlight-domain
    >programming-domain urn:oasis:names:tc:dita:programming-domain
    >ui-domain - urn:oasis:names:tc:dita:ui-domain
    >utilities-domain - urn:oasis:names:tc:dita:utilities-domain
    >software-domain - urn:oasis:names:tc:dita:software-domain
    >
    >
    >There are a couple methods in which a namespaces can be bound to the XML
    >Schemas.
    >
    >Method - 1
    >  -The namespace for each specialization is bound in the schema shell
    >files.
    >  -The namespace would then be assumed (chameleon effect) by all included
    >schemas in the primary XML Schema and would not
    >affect specialization. For example, wiztask which includes task, topic and
    >the domains would all have the same namespace.
    >With this method we can make full use of XML Schema inheritance to create
    >new specialization.  Inheritance helps developers validate
    >new DITA specialization when validating the XML Schema rather that manually
    >checking whether or not a new specialization follows the
    >DITA specialization rules.
    >
    >Method - 2
    >  -The namespace for each specialization is bound in the in the schema
    >shell specializations and modules.
    >  -If domain and specialization have their own individual namespaces in
    >this case. For example, wiztask would  import task, topic and the domains
    >would all have different namespaces a could pose some potential issues with
    >regards to stylesheets and conref with XSLT 1.0 processors.
    >  - This method would also have an impact on the architecture of the XML
    >Schemas. Currently, we attempt to use XML Schema inheritance to help
    >    validate the new XML Schema specialization with the hope that XS 1.1
    >will resolve a lot, if not all, of the issues regarding inheritance today.
    >    XML Schema inheritance can only apply to schemas in the same namespace
    >or null (no) namespace.  This would mean that the XML Schemas
    >    would have to be specialized without XML Schema inheritance.
    >
    >[1]http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3121.txt
    >
    >Kind regards,
    >Eric
    >Eric A. Sirois
    >Staff Software Developer
    >DB2 Universal Database - DBA XML Tools Development
    >IBM Canada Ltd. - Toronto Software Lab
    >Email: esirois@ca.ibm.com
    >Phone:(905) 413-2841
    >Blue Pages (Internal)
    
    


    [Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]