Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: Clark Evans <email@example.com>
- To: David Megginson <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 16:06:36 +0000
David Megginson wrote:
> As far as Namespaces is concerned, the namespace URI is a black box --
> it doesn't point to anything, and it doesn't mean anything. The
> creator, however, is free to add internal structure:
First, thank you for your reply. It was helpful. However,
I do know, the spec dosn't say _how_ to use namespaces.
When you design something, it helps to have several
"use cases" that describe _how_ the software/standard/etc.
will/could be used to solve a real world problem. This
is what I'm after. How does one do versioning?
Let's say that one of your clients, BigTools, was
using your architecture
to describe their products.
Now lets say that I'm the author of a simple tool
vendor search engine. Suppose this engine only needs
information defined by a small subset of your
architecture. To make things interesting, let's say
I do this for 500 vendors....
Now. One year later, you make a few "backward"
compatible changes to the architecture, and
convert all of your clients, including BigTools,
to this new version.
Shouldn't there be a way to mark the namespace
so that it is knowable (from the declaration?)
is a proper subset of the newer:
_or_ a way to know that they are not backward compatible?
I suppose that your new architecture could define,
in its definition, the mapping to the old architecture.
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:email@example.com
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:email@example.com the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org)