[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: "Don Park" <donpark@quake.net>
- To: <xml-dev@ic.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 01:30:49 -0700
I have read the latest namespace spec. While I am sure that a lot
considerations and discussions have gone into the spec, I am compelled to
ask why something like the following was not chosen?
<?xml version="1.0"?>
<!-- initially, the default namespace is "books" -->
<xml:namespace uri="urn:loc.gov:books">
<xml:namespace prefix="isbn" uri="'urn:ISBN:0-395-36341-6">
<book>
<title>Cheaper by the Dozen</title>
<isbn:number>1568491379</isbn:number>
<notes>
<!-- drop the default into HTML for some commentary -->
<xml:namespace uri='urn:w3-org-ns:HTML'>
<p>
This is a <i>funny</i> book!
</p>
</xml:namespace>
</notes>
</book>
</xml:namespace>
</xml:namespace>
If attribute-based namespace declaration is the only way to go, why not use
a simple word like 'namespace' instead of 'xmlns' so that its purpose is
clear to the reader?
If 'namespace' is too common, people can qualify it with 'xml' like this
'xml:namespace'? Why not consider changing the name of the standard to
something shorter?
Saving of 4 characters does seem quite worth the use of obscure word like
'xmlns' for something as common as namespace.
Best wishes,
Don Park
CTO/Docuverse
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)
|