[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: james anderson <James.Anderson@mecomnet.de>
- To: XML Dev <xml-dev@ic.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 13:05:44 +0100
I make no claim that that the association is automatic. I simply point out
that namespaces (in particular, together with the element technique alluded to
in mr cowan's message) <EM>can</EM> be used to permit the same degree of
precision in descriptions. The syntax is different, and notation attributes
may well be a more compact expression, but the relations are the same.
W. Eliot Kimber wrote:
>
> At 07:49 PM 11/14/98 +0100, james anderson wrote:
> >the situation described below is a case where a namespace prefix is well used
> >to ensure unambiguous naming. if one uses the notation or entity name as the
> >name prefix it awards the same expressive power as the implicit qualification
> >of data attributes.
>
> I don't think it works though, because you don't know for sure that a given
> prefixed attribute is associated with a given entity--besides entity names
> are not, as far as I know, definable as namespace prefixes (that is, if a
> prefix happens to be spelled the same as an entity name, there's nothing
> that defines a necessary relationship between the two).
automatically no, permitted yes. (they are both 'Name's, aren't they?)
as the dtd writer, one would have to chose the names to the desired effect.
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)
|
