[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
>That sounds like a distinction without a difference to me. Precisely what
>are you suggesting we change in the Infoset, for example?
I don't think Simon realistically expects any change to the Infoset.
So it boils down to conventions for applications and vocabulary
designers.
The most obvious is that you should never give different meanings
to x:a and a-on-an-x:-element, and I think everyone agrees with that.
I'm not sure that anyone has ever done it (have they?).
What else?
There's no point in having a namespaced version of an attribute that
is only ever used on elements from that namespace [*]. It's verbose and
contrary to current practice. So the attributes at issue are the ones
that need to be namespaced because they can be used on other elements
- they're global attributes - and are *also* used on elements from
that namespace. We could have say
(a) Always use the namespaced version, even on elements from the same
namespace.
(b) Always use the unnamespaced version on elements from the same
namespace.
(c) Let users do whichever they like, and ensure that applications treat
them both the same.
(a) makes instances more verbose.
(b) and (c) make applications and stylesheets longer and less
readable, eg <xs:template match="@rdf:about|rdf:*/@about">
Always putting the attributes in a different namespace from the elements
is much like (a).
If you like (a), you might disagree with my claim [*] above, and say
that for consistency *all* your attributes should be namespaced.
-- Richard
|
