RE: Namespaces, schemas, Simon's filters.

[Michael Brennan <Michael_Brennan@allegis.com>]

> From: Evan Lenz [mailto:elenz@xyzfind.com]

<snip/>

> Ron Bourret wrote:
> > I thought of a shorter summary of this:
> >
> > 1) A fundamental assumption of XML is that element types are global.
> 
> Perhaps it's because I don't come from an SGML background and 
> I haven't used
> DTDs much, but this has *not* been one of my assumptions if 
> what you mean by
> "element types are global" is that there is always a one-to-one
> correspondence between an element name and a content model.

<snip/>

> > 2) The namespaces spec reinforces (1) by providing technology that
> > allows people to make element type names be universally unique.
> 
> The namespace spec never reinforced this for me. I think this 
> goes well
> beyond what the namespace spec dictates. 

I would have agreed with you just a few minutes ago. However, I just went
back and reviewed the XML Namespace spec. Sure enough, in section A.2
(http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-xml-names-19990114/#ns-breakdown), you'll
find the following language:

    The All Element Types Partition 
    All element types in an XML namespace appear in this 
    partition. Each has a unique local part; the combination 
    of the namespace name and the local part uniquely 
    identifies the element type. 

Right or wrong, that's what the spec says. So either XML Schema is wrong, or
XML Namespaces is wrong.