[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Kian-Tat Lim wrote:
> I [ktlim] wrote:
> > > Everyone agrees that a namespace is a collection of related
> > > names, whether they be for elements or attributes.
>
> Joe English wrote:
> > I most emphatically do *not* agree with this [*].
> >
> > An XML namespace as defined by "Namespaces in XML" is *not* a
> > collection of related names in any meaningful sense.
>
> Well, then, why is the definition of an XML namespace
> "a collection of names, identified by a URI reference
> [RFC2396], which are used in XML documents as element
> types and attribute names"?
I have no idea why it's defined that way. That sentence is
at best meaningless, and at worst wrong and misleading.
> Is the objection to the
> word "related"? What if I define that to mean related
> only in the sense of sharing a URI reference identifier,
> not in the sense of sharing any kind of semantic meaning
> or intended use?
Now *that* makes sense. Under that interpretation,
'html:head' and 'html:OZZY-R00LS' from my previous
example are indeed related, by virtue of having the
same namespace name.
--Joe English
jenglish@flightlab.com
|
