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] Vocabulary Combination

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> wrote:
| Arjun Ray wrote:

|> it is written: "The only reason namespaces exist, once again, is to give
|> elements and attributes programmer-friendly names that will be unique
|> across the whole Internet."
| 
| Don't be silly.  Why would you want names that are unique on a wide 
| scale if you weren't going to be combining vocabularies?

*I* don't want them.  In fact, I don't even need them.  (All I'd need is
unique names for vocabularies, the good ol' PUBLIC id concept.)  I'm just
curious about a pretty common delusion about the problem.  

| Interesting thought experiment.  Why did you leave the <h:head><h:title> 
| construct out of the HTML view?

Editing accident, sorry.

| Upon reflection, I'm not convinced that this "views" approach is useful.

I find it very useful.
 
| Merely subtracting any of the markup vocabularies is almost never apt 
| the right thing to do. 

That's ridiculous.  That would make you hostage to anyone who stuck in a
namespace/vocabulary that you had no clue about.  To announce, in instance
markup, that a vocabulary is in play is to allow for the possibility of
*partial* understanding - which happens to include the possibility of "all
I need to know anyway".  

| If what you're trying to do is display this, 

I was careful to leave specific purposes out.  Why have generalized markup
if all w're supposed to be interested in is specific purposes and no
others?  

|> If this is acceptable, then my question is: What is the decision procedure
|> by which a generic parser-level filter could generate these views, if it's
|> to take namespaced names as a guide?
| 
| Totally application-dependent, I'd think.  It doesn't seem likely that 
| "generic parser-level filter" is a very useful construct.

You just found one yourself, with the RDBMS loader application.

| > "It can't be done" is an acceptable answer, btw.
| 
| In the general case, it can't be done.  The namespaces don't give you 
| enough information. 

Right.  Namespaces are neither necessary nor sufficient for the general
problem of vocabulary combination.

As we knew a long time ago.





 

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

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