Lists Home |
Date Index |
- To: xml-dev <email@example.com>
- Subject: Re: [xml-dev] Co-operating with Architectural Forms
- From: Lars Marius Garshol <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: 03 Feb 2002 22:42:38 +0100
- In-reply-to: <email@example.com>
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
* Tim Bray
| If we had wanted to do namespaces on just elements, not attributes,
| I'm pretty sure we would have ended up with AFs or equivalent.
* Lars Marius Garshol
| This I don't follow. How would you have gotten the processing
| semantics and resulting naming freedom by taking that approach?
* Tim Bray
| Instead of <html:img xmlns:html="http://www.w3.org/1999/html4/" we
| would have <img xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/html4/"
But you still have to call it 'img', don't you? There's no way you
could call it 'bilde' or 'figure', or did I miss something?
| Kind of nice I think.
With fixed attributes, yes. Without, absolutely not.
Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian <URL: http://www.ontopia.net >
ISO SC34/WG3, OASIS GeoLang TC <URL: http://www.garshol.priv.no >