Re: <reductions>

[Joel E. Denny]

On Tue, 9 Oct 2007, Tim Van Holder wrote:

> Joel E. Denny wrote:
> > xml2xhtml.xsl and xml2text.xsl now share a template for computing 
> > conflicts.  As Akim suggested, I've started a library.  I named it 
> > bison.xsl.  I set the namespace URI for its contents as:
> > 
> >   http://www.gnu.org/software/bison/
> > 
> > because I figured it's the most obvious choice.  However, I usually prefer 
> > something like:
> > 
> >   http://www.gnu.org/software/bison/VERSION/
> > 
> > where VERSION will be 2.3b in the next release.  This cleanly separates 
> > names that have changed between releases.  What do others think?  Is there 
> > any GNU convention here?  If not, is there any other convention we should 
> > consider adopting?
> 
> If you use a HTTP URI as namespace, it should really point to the schema
> in question, so that it can be fetched remotely (see
> http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform for example, although that is just
> a stub schema).

I do think we should have a schema in the Bison distribution at least.  
My preference is XSD.  I'm not sure if we're ready yet to write it though.

> For XSLTs where that isn't needed (or not needed yet), I tend to just
> use URNs.

In general, I like to use the http scheme and point to some related web 
page.  It's built-in documentation in some way.  However, I'm not sure if 
we want to get into maintaining a web page with multiple versions for this 
purpose.  That's one reason I went with the URI that I committed.  
Pointing to a schema is fine, but that demands versioning, I think.

> For bison you could use "urn:x-gnu:bison:2.3b" or something.

Is there a precedent for this?  I guess x = xml?