[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
From: "Hunsberger, Peter" <Peter.Hunsberger@stjude.org>
>
> All of which is a long winded way of arriving at the conclusion that: you
> don't need namespaces if you precisely understand the context of the
> combined vocabularies, but until you combine the vocabularies you probably
> want the name spaces if only to help in combining the vocabularies.
I have been working on a new vocabulary (RNA) [1]. The specification allows
additional vocabularies (Vocabulary A) to be combined, as long as the
following limitations are met:
1) The document must always be of RNA, but may contain Vocabulary A. In
other words, RNA cannot be used inside of a document of Vocabulary A.
2) Vocabulary A elements and attributes must always be namespace-qualified.
As a result, RNA is never namespace-qualified. In an earlier incarnation of
the spec, I had placed RNA within a namespace since I knew there was
potential for combination with other vocabularies. In some conversations on
namespaces, it was pointed out to me that this wasn't necessary given the
above limitations and that keeping namespaces out allowed for easier
processing of the document using standard tools. This made sense to me, so
I removed the namespace stuff (with the exception of "extensions" [2]).
Now, this vocabulary has no namespace but has specific rules for namespaced
vocabularies to be used with it.
It seems to me that this is the correct way to go about handling namespaces,
at least in this case.
---
Seairth Jacobs
seairth@seairth.com
[1] http://www.seairth.com/web/rna
[2] http://www.seairth.com/web/rna#extension
|
