[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: "Steven R. Newcomb" <srn@techno.com>
- To: paul@prescod.net
- Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 20:39:40 -0500
[Paul Prescod:]
> ...XML 1.0 and namespaces are more or less in conflict about the
> mapping from names to "things" and namespaces are considered more
> canonical by the people developing specifications.
Well, certainly not by everyone who is developing specifications. Not
yet, anyway.
It is still unknown how namespaces will actually support industrial
communications, except where proprietary software determines, in a
proprietary way, what constitutes syntactic conformance to the
syntactic requirements of multiple independently-designed namespaces
in the same document. More: it's still impossible to make a single
element be recognized as presumably conformant to a name in more than
one namespace. Namespaces are still a paradigm that requires that
there be a single monopolistic software vendor for each namespace.
When they finally wake up to the cost of this madness, industries will
not accept the idea of making their lifeblood vocabularies hostage to
particular software vendors. The XML Namespace paradigm has a lot of
maturing to do before it starts being a safe way for industries to
both communicate and protect themselves from monopolistic control over
their ability to communicate.
-Steve
--
Steven R. Newcomb, President, TechnoTeacher, Inc.
srn@techno.com http://www.techno.com ftp.techno.com
voice: +1 972 517 7954
fax +1 972 517 4571
Suite 211
7101 Chase Oaks Boulevard
Plano, Texas 75025 USA
***************************************************************************
This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers.
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@xml.org&BODY=unsubscribe%20xml-dev
List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
***************************************************************************
|
