[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: "Clark C. Evans" <clark.evans@manhattanproject.com>
- To: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
- Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 22:49:33 -0500 (EST)
On Wed, 29 Dec 1999, Tim Bray wrote:
> At 08:44 PM 12/29/99 -0500, Joe Lapp wrote:
> >So I'm thinking that we need a *standard* way to organize namespaces
> >hierarchically, and that we need one before namespace usage is so
> >widespread that we absolutely have to provide regex support.
>
> Sounds like a good idea. How about a proposal? Shorter is better.
I don't remember where, but I remember reading an example where
a URL was given as the xmlns URI -- pointing to an XmlSchema;
thus, not only uniquely defining the namespace, but also
identifying the element definitions in that namespace. So,
this is how I had seen namespaces being powerful, as a pointer
to meta-data.
That being said, I had never expected a set of namespaces
to have value by organizing them hierarchially... so I'm
wondering exactly what value a hierarchy of namespaces would
provide? Would it be a sequence of ever-so-much-more-specific
schemas? Where the most specific definition is the binding
one? I can't think of any other reasons why I'd have more
than one namespace for a given "domain", let alone a
hierarchically organized set. What am I missing?
Thanks!
Clark
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/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
unsubscribe 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)
|