xml-dev - RE: Tag naming convention

[Mike Sharp <msharp@lante.com>]

Thanks Len,
That's about how I figured.  But even though XML doesn't care, sometimes *we*
do.  As far as I can tell, there is nothing particularly to recommend the
practice--no advantage that using a mixed-case convention wouldn't address.  It
seems like it would be confusing to newcomers.  I'm not sure I understand how
using a namespace would solve the issue, as was mentioned in the earlier thread
you mentioned.

Speaking of which, I thought I had seen a thread on this earlier, but couldn't
find it in the archives. After reading your messag, I went back and finally
found it in June.  Missed it before.   The operative word is "some" months
back...  Is there a way to search them?  Working from home on a modem rather
than the office on a T3 is somewhat a dis-incentive to following links in an
archive!

Regards,
Mike Sharp






"Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com> on 09/28/2000 12:17:06 PM

To:   Mike Sharp/Lante@Lante
cc:   xml-dev@lists.xml.org

Subject:  RE: Tag naming convention



I asked this same question some months back.
It should be in the archives somewhere.  Tim
Bray and others responded.  In one case it comes down
to whether or not mapping to associative array
names (eg, the obj.thang) will
conflict.  Otherwise, it is an acceptable practice
because as always

XML Doesn't Care.


Len Bullard