[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Evan Lenz wrote:
>
>...
>
> <troll $NS="">
> If SGML compatibility isn't a constraint for XML 2.0, perhaps it should use
> something other than an attribute-like syntax. And they could be made global
> instead of scoped to elements...
> </troll>
I'll take a whack at that troll. The SGML-heads tried to make namespaces
global and (IIRC, use a syntax other than attributes). But here's Tim
Berners-Lee's opinion:
http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Extensible.html#Local
SGML compatibility had nothing to do with the scoped attribute syntax.
Also:
4.9) Why are special attributes used to declare XML namespaces?
I don't know the answer to this question, but the likely reason is that
they simplify the process of moving fragments of one document to another
document. An early draft of the XML namespaces recommendation proposed
using processing instructions to declare XML namespaces. While these
were simple to read and process, they weren't easy to move to other
documents. Attributes, on the other hand, are intimately attached to the
elements being moved.
http://www.rpbourret.com/xml/NamespacesFAQ.htm
Paul Prescod
|
