[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: "Simon St.Laurent" <SimonStL@classic.msn.com>
- To: "Xml-Dev (E-mail)" <xml-dev@ic.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 30 Jun 98 22:38:26 UT
James Anderson wrote:
>the extra resolution mechanism, should it be necessary, still does not
>require an additional means of expression.
We have two choices:
a) we can use the same means of expression already provided, and make it
harder to distinguish XSchema namespaces from the namespaces used for the
contents of those XSchemas. It may seem more elegant to those who would like
one and only one way of declaring something.
b) we can use an additional means of expression. This may not seem as
consistent, but brings other advantages, like the ability to provide
documentation about what a namespace is really representing, anyway.
I'm still in the b) camp. I really don't want XSchemas to have to rely on
_any_ PIs; I'm even irritated by the PI needed for the XSchema namespace
itself. PIs are gradually blooming across the XML landscape like hideous
rotten flowers. (Yes, I'm strongly biased against PIs, if you hadn't noticed
already.)
Simon St.Laurent
Dynamic HTML: A Primer / XML: A Primer / Cookies
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@ic.ac.uk)
|
