[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
<Quote>
that aren't so abstract to be illegible?
</Quote>
At the risk of going in a circle here: Isn't this the job of the
namespace prefix/identifier at the top of an XML schema/XML document?
Namespace prefixes are merely syntactic sugar, and are not even passed
to the Infoset. Do they really deserve that heavy an emphasis?
Kind Regards,
Joe Chiusano
Booz | Allen | Hamilton
Jeff Lowery wrote:
>
> >
> > As with your response. ;)
> >
> > Care to elaborate? (question was regarding the use of hierarchical
> > URN/URLs).
>
> I was hoping that would be elaboration enough. <g>
>
> Okay, to be more explicit, would you really want to type (or read) something
> like:
>
> urn:us:gov:dod:don:navy:
>
> in front of each and every element and attribute name in a hypothetical Navy
> XML document? I wouldn't, although I do the equivalent in Java often enough.
>
> I think the pertinent question is: are there enough short string sequences
> for all namespace identifiers, now and in the future, that aren't so
> abstract to be illegible? In other words, could one be stuck for a
> meaningful short string ns ID because all the ones they wanted to use are in
> use by others?
>
> Thanks for being persistent, anyway. Good questions, all.
begin:vcard
n:Chiusano;Joseph
tel;work:(703) 902-6923
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:www.bah.com
org:Booz | Allen | Hamilton;IT Digital Strategies Team
adr:;;8283 Greensboro Drive;McLean;VA;22012;
version:2.1
email;internet:chiusano_joseph@bah.com
title:Senior Consultant
fn:Joseph M. Chiusano
end:vcard
|
