Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: email@example.com (Terje Norderhaug)
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2000 11:31:29 -0800
At 10:58 AM 2/5/00, Tim Bray wrote:
>At 10:28 AM 2/5/00 -0800, Terje Norderhaug wrote:
>>My proposal is NOT based on storing a combined namespace-name pair in a
>>single string. Instead, the string only consists of the local name.
>>Given that each local name is internalized in its namespace, it becomes
>>possible to find the namespace of a local name without encoding the
>>namespace as part of the string.
>Wow. For a second I thought "what a brilliant idea, why didn't anyone
>think of it before". And maybe it is.
>Hm... is it a problem that you
>can have an element type and an attribute name in the same namespace,
>but they're really different names?
>E.g. <b:foo b:foo="32" />
>the two b:foo's are really different things. -Tim
Are element names and attribute names really different things? I'd say
that's a choice. I don't see many benefits of making them different things,
while keeping them the same would simplify implementation a lot. It's the
elements and attributes that are different things.
-- Terje <email@example.com> | Media Design in*Progress
Software for Mac Web Professionals at <http://www.in-progress.com>
Take advantage of XML with Emile, the first XML editor for Mac!