[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Wed, 2005-01-12 at 14:40 -0500, Roger L. Costello wrote:
> >I assume that this question has as its impetus ...
>
> Here's my motivation for the question: in a large, complex Enterprise you
> may know the kinds of "things" that need to be moved around (e.g., Book,
> BookCover, etc) but you don't have a-priori knowledge of the specific
> transactions that will be needed.
>
> So, is it feasible to simply declare a bunch of components (that everyone
> understands), which may be dynamically assembled by one system and shipped
> to another system where the assembly is dynamically understood.
Being naive, I / we, thought that's what namespaces were all about some
time ago.
I 'see' (find in my inbox, whatever) 5 things (namespaced integrated
instances) in
one document. Rogers scenario. I'm assuming James C and friends haven't
got DSDL into plain English by 'now'.
The n'th one is using the xyz namespace (call it docbook for realisms
sake). So, off I go to docbook.org, and find that there is this thing
called docbook, and Norm and friends understand it, so I hook into
his understanding of docbook, and add that to Rogers mix.
That was the theory.
The practise? Durned things called people get in the way.
As MK so cynically puts it.
"We all so nicely misunderstand it", which is probably too close to the
truth.
1. The W3C tell me I can't disambiguate a namespace by de-referencing
it. Shuuugar.
2. When I find docbook, Norm (being rotten like he is) doesn't tell me
what semantic interpretation he puts on these elements..... in a way
that moves over the Atlantic | pond with clarity.
3. I try these moves... get confused, and give up.
So no Roger. I'm sulking by now, or confused (if I'm a machine).
Sigh.
--
Regards,
Dave Pawson
XSLT + Docbook FAQ
http://www.dpawson.co.uk
|
