[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
>On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 23:36:03 +0200, mihaiu@mihaiu.name
><mihaiu@mihaiu.name> wrote:
>
>>>The rationale is to allow attributes whose semantics are independent of the
>>>element they appear on: examples are xml:lang, xml:base, xsi:type,
>>>xsl:version.
>>>
>> The purpose of a namespace is to make it easier to avoid name
collisions. The
>>special attributes that you speak about only need some kind to special syntax
>>in order to distinguish them from the others.
>
>
>Yeah, that speciial syntax is called namespaces...
>
><snip>new form of special case syntax adding yet more semantic confusion</snip>
>
I am not an adept of any new form. In order to be able to group attributes
with special meaning you only need syntax changes and not namespaces which in
my understanding have a "deeper" meaning.
>> I hope that you understand me: there is no need for namespaces in this
case
>>because namespaces are designed to solve a *completely* different set of
>>problems.
>
>
>Prey tell, exactly what would that be?
>
To avoid name collision as much as possible. What do you use namespaces for,
Peter ?
>> One more thing: you said "independent". For mode clarity I will quote
you
>>again:
>>
>>>The rationale is to allow attributes whose semantics are independent of the
>>>element they appear on:
>>
>>The attributes are not independent from the element containing them; they
apply
>>to the containing element inclusively. For example the xml:lang attribute: if
>>this attribute is applied to a mixed content element then you expect that the
>>#PCDATA from the current element will respect the xml:lang attribute (not only
>>its children).
>
>
>You appear to be confusing semantics with scope.
>
I may confuse a lot of things. Please explain what you mean.
Regards,
Razvan
|
