[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Namespaces, schemas, Simon's filters.
- From: Peter Piatko <piatko@research.telcordia.com>
- To: Ronald Bourret <rpbourret@rpbourret.com>, xml-dev@lists.xml.org
- Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2001 08:41:59 -0400
Maybe "type" should be namespace qualified?
On second thought maybe the phrase "element type" should be namespace
qualified? Is "type" then a locally scoped element? Does it belong in the
namespace or not?
;-)
Thanks,
Peter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ronald Bourret" <rpbourret@rpbourret.com>
To: <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
Sent: Saturday, August 25, 2001 4:03 AM
Subject: Re: Namespaces, schemas, Simon's filters.
> Tim Bray wrote:
<snip/>
> > HMMMMM... is part of the problem here the heavy overloading
> > of the word "type"? -Tim
>
> Undoubtedly.
>
> -- Ron
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
> initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
>
> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
>
>
- Prev by Date:
Re: Namespaces, schemas, Simon's filters.
- Next by Date:
Re: Namespaces, schemas, and scholasticism (was RE: Namespaces,sch emas, Simon's filters.)
- Previous by thread:
Re: Namespaces, schemas, Simon's filters.
- Next by thread:
RE: Namespaces, schemas, Simon's filters.
- Index(es):