Lists Home |
Date Index |
Alessandro Triglia wrote:
> When people complain about namespaces, do they mean that namespaces should
> not exist at all? Do they think they are useless? Or do they think they
> should be replaced by something else? Or do they have in mind some simple
> changes to the syntax, such as using URI/localname pairs everywhere?
When I complain about namespaces, it's just the opposite:
I *don't* want to have to use URI/localname pairs everywhere.
I'd rather treat element type names and attribute names
as simple, atomic strings. This is possible with a sane API,
but most XML APIs aren't sane.
And of course when you get into serialization/deserialization
or QNames-in-content, it gets even worse: then you have to
worry about namespace prefixes and in-scope namespaces too.