[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
What are the solutions? I see two, both breaking backwards incompatibility:
1) describe a canonical namespace <-> prefix mapping system that is to be
maintained and updated at each processing step
2) describe a lexical representation for Universal Names (UNames) such as
{http://example.org}foo, and mandate that each processing step resolve and
discard prefixes. This basically denigrates prefixes to transient shorthand
for editing. (Likewise, if the UNames prove too hard to read, you can set up
your editor to convert UNames to QNames for known namespaces).
What else can work? You either maintain proxy identifiers, or discard them
and operate only on the identifiers themselves. The latter seems the
cleanest solution, but I already hear the howls of derision as I press this
little send button...
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Tobin [mailto:richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 4:41 AM
> To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> Subject: Re: [xml-dev] [good] Question about NS 1.1
>
>
> >>Here's a proposal for XML 1.1 + Namespaces 1.1: namespace
> declarations are
> >>decreed not to apply to attribute or element content (listen for the
> >>screams).
>
> >That is an astoundingly good idea.
> >
> >And very much in concert with the spirit of XML 1.0, and Tim
> Bray's beloved
> >"80/20" point philosophy.
>
> So you place XSLT on the "20" side?
>
> -- Richard
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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 list use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
>
|
