If we can have a http: scheme URI for the base of link rel, then why not for the namespace?
Personally I would prefer a http: URI for the reasons Dan mentioned. The use of these is widespread - every single namespace URI I have seen in the context of syndication follows this pattern. Is current practice compelling at all? I fail to see why the IETF might object to a http: scheme URI given their current use elsewhere, and the best current practice reflected in the WebArch doc. The benefit would be in human-discoverability of docs and machine discoverability of schemas by dereferencing the URI with HTTP. I note in passing that RFC 2396bis says: [[ Future specifications and related documentation should use the general term "URI", rather than the more restrictive terms URL and URN. ]] Cheers, Danny. -- http://dannyayers.com
