Heck, while we are here, why don't we just do:

xmlns:f="jsf:core"
xmlns:h="jsf:html"
xmlns:ui="jsf:ui"

I'm trying to think if there are problems with doing that, but we can associate the schema with these shorter names. The real benefit of using a full-blown URI is that you can avoid conflicts w/ other namespace providers. But since we are JSF (there can be only one JSF, evil laugh) then why not?

-Dan