OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

 


 

   Re: [xml-dev] A multi-step approach on defining object-orientednatureof

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]


John Cowan wrote:

> Joe English scripsit:
>
> > (Actually, I would go one step further and argue that
> > any XML vocabulary which is not designed to be mixed
> > with elements from other vocabularies ought not to use
> > namespaces at all.  There are valid arguments against
> > this position, of course.)
>
> I hold that it is inappropriate to label a namespace "Not to be
> combined with others"; names in namespaces are resources for
> constructing document (types).


I think that's more or less in agreement with what I believe.

The main reason for using namespace names in a vocabulary
is so that it can be with other vocabularies to form a document
type [*].  On the other hand, if a document type contains only
words from a single vocabulary designed specifically for that
document type and for no others, there's no reason to use
namespaces at all.


[*] "document type" in the SGML sense.  I'm not sure what the
    accepted XML term for this concept is, or even if there is one.


--Joe English

  jenglish@flightlab.com




 

News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS