Re: URI for XML schema and namespace

' =JeffH ' <Jeff.Hodges@KingsMountain.com> Tue, 08 January 2008 23:59 UTC

Return-path: <discuss-bounces@apps.ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCOM9-0004GU-MS; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 18:59:41 -0500
Received: from discuss by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JCOM8-0004GJ-Ru for discuss-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 18:59:40 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCOM8-0004GB-HT for discuss@apps.ietf.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 18:59:40 -0500
Received: from outbound-mail-16.bluehost.com ([69.89.20.231]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCOM7-0003Tk-0S for discuss@apps.ietf.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 18:59:40 -0500
Received: (qmail 32203 invoked by uid 0); 8 Jan 2008 22:52:01 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO box7.bluehost.com) (69.89.30.147) by mailproxy1.bluehost.com with SMTP; 8 Jan 2008 22:52:01 -0000
Received: from [209.234.108.194] (helo=KingsMountain.com) by box7.bluehost.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from <Jeff.Hodges@KingsMountain.com>) id 1JCNId-0002C1-RC for discuss@apps.ietf.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 15:51:59 -0700
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.7.2 01/07/2005 (debian 1:2.7.2-7) with nmh-1.1
Subject: Re: URI for XML schema and namespace
To: "Apps Discuss" <discuss@apps.ietf.org>
In-reply-to: "tom.petch" <cfinss@dial.pipex.com> 's message of Fri, 04 Jan 2008 14:19:10 +0100
From: ' =JeffH ' <Jeff.Hodges@KingsMountain.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 14:52:02 -0800
X-Identified-User: {32571:box7.bluehost.com:kingsmou:kingsmountain.com} {sentby:bopbeforesmtp 209.234.108.194 authed with kingsmountain.com}
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 7655788c23eb79e336f5f8ba8bce7906
Message-Id: <E1JCOM8-0004GJ-Ru@megatron.ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: discuss@apps.ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Apps Discuss <discuss@apps.ietf.org>
List-Id: general discussion of application-layer protocols <discuss.apps.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>, <mailto:discuss-request@apps.ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:discuss@apps.ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:discuss-request@apps.ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>, <mailto:discuss-request@apps.ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: discuss-bounces@apps.ietf.org

FWIW, in the SAML specifications, we used URNs. E.g. see the table on pp 7-8 
in section 1.1 of..

  http://docs.oasis-open.org/security/saml/v2.0/saml-core-2.0-os.pdf

  urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:assertion
  urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:protocol


Likewise, we used URNs in the Liberty Alliance specifications. E.g. see table 
1 on p-8, section 2.1 of..

  http://www.projectliberty.org/liberty/content/download/3484/23078/file/libert
y-idwsf-soap-binding-v2.0-original.pdf


  urn:liberty:sb:2006-08
  urn:liberty:sb
  

=JeffH