Lists Home |
Date Index |
Chiusano Joseph wrote:
> Absolutely. However, my references were to the use of namespaces to between vocabularies,
> not within the same vocabulary. So I was referencing cases where one may want/need to
> combine multiple vocabularies in the same document.
Again, it's still not clear what you are offering in response to Bill de hÓra's original
> Does anyone have an example of a collision that can only be solved, or even best be solved
> with XML Namespaces?
So far I have not seen even an example (i.e., within document scope) of a collision, let
alone a collision which might impel us to XML Namespaces as a solution. In framing his
original question, Bill de hÓra illustrated that the apparent example of collision used for
illustration in the Namespaces Rec does not in fact evidence any such thing. Grant for the
sake of this discussion that somewhere in the combination of 'multiple vocabularies in the
same document' such an example is imaginable; could you then provide us an instance
> By 2 different federal agencies using the element name "StateCode" in 2 different ways.
> The 2 agencies do not collaborate on their element names, so they cannot agree to use 2
> different names. Or, even if they did collaborate, there may be a very good reason to use
> the same element name for these 2 different contexts.
As you have framed this, the hypothetical collision will be found, if at all, on the plane
of universal names, which is by definition not the scope of names in XML. Is there to your
knowledge an example which can be framed as XML?