URI for XML schema - why bother?

["tom.petch" <cfinss at dial.pipex.com>]

Well, actually it was ' there is not point in having a schema name'.

I asked before what form URI should take for namespace and schema, and
I got a very clear answer, for which thank you.

But in two separate WGs I have proposed that schema should be given a URI and it
hasn't happened, in one case with the reply to the effect that they add no value
and are not worth having.

Instinctively I disagree and know of other WGs that do define them (although I
also saw an I-D which used a schema URI and then removed it before becoming an
RFC).

So what rational arguments might I advance as to why it is a good idea to name a
schema with a URI?

Tom Petch.