Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: MikeDacon@aol.com
- To: email@example.com
- Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 17:26:32 EST
In a message dated 3/8/99 12:19:24 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> Yes, but what about filters that perform specialised actions? And
> what about adding support (stable or experimental) for new XML-related
> features like schemas, datatyping, and linking as they become
You are absolutely right that extensibility is important. And, as
you also stated, both naming schemes provide that ability.
> As I wrote before, it doesn't much matter whether we use Java property
> names incorporating domain names (like
> 'org.xml.sax.features.validation') or URIs (like
> 'http://xml.org/sax/features/validation'), as long as we have the
> ability for people to create new names without fear of collision.
Why do you need a domain name in there? I think one Parser/Filter implementor
would be loathe to implement another companies feature name if it had
sun.com or microsoft.com in it. That was the chief problem that developers
had with Sun naming the Swing package com.sun.swing. I thought your
features would have a single root tree like:
So that all features would be:
as well as
sax.props (for properties)
Now, I understand the domain name being in there is a piggyback off of DNS.
But, I still believe that functional features (of both Parser and Filters) are
finite domain -- whereas the web is not. That is why I don't see the
between this feature set and XML namespaces. If you agree that features and
props are a finite domain (and in the whole scheme of things a rather small
then a single naming tree should suffice.
Also, Daniel Brickley mentioned a Java bias. I can understand his
concern; heck, let's separate them with the delimiter of your choice
(hyphens, underscore, etc.).
While we are on the subject of bias: a URI has a resource/file system
bias. To me, that bias was just confusing (and overkill) for something that
I felt was best expressed with one word String constants (if you added
the initial default set to the interface).
Lastly, I would like to say that I do like your idea for the general
property query and am glad you proposed it. The naming concerns I
express here I deem as minor issues.
- Mike (firstname.lastname@example.org)
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)