[LAD] minimal LV2

[Gabriel M. Beddingfield]

On Sun, 13 Jun 2010, fons at kokkinizita.net wrote:

>>> What is the purpose of 'http://' in that case ?
>>
>> They're just symbols.
>
> OK, let me rephrase the question: why are such ambiguous
> or misleading 'symbols' being used ?

It's up to the authors of those components.  I agree, using 
http:// should be discouraged unless it's a persisent URL.

I think the LV2 devs encourge these URI's to /be/ persistent 
URL's... so they haven't opted to define a URI scheme (e.g. 
lv2://).  But I think having an LV2 URI scheme would be a 
Good Thing.

Unfortunately, in XML namespaces (also URI's) this happens 
often, too.

-gabriel