|
Nicely said Nico I agree attributes should be in the
default namespace if unqualified. I think you clearly described a sort of
name lookup - perhaps based on path - to resolve which namespace a name belongs
to. I am nervous about proposing a model that requires more p Jim From: nico
[mailto:ndebeiss@gmail.com] Hello If there is a default namespace declaration in scope,
the expanded
name corresponding to an unprefixed element name has the URI of the default
namespace as its namespace name. If there is no default namespace
declaration in scope, the namespace name has no value. The namespace name for
an unprefixed attribute name always has no value. In all cases, the local
name is local
part (which is of course the same as the unprefixed name itself). " The 1st paragraph does not say a lot as you can see... The 2nd paragraph says that unprefixed attribute has
no namespace (you get null with APIs). That is a trick that is useless for me.
I think that attributes namespaces should be p
2009/7/8 Jim Tivy <jimt@bluestream.com> Absolutely, see my second
sentence: "For a number of use
cases I have seen namespaces work. They are integrated in most Xml p As well, we can only
focus on so many things and learn so many things and the lead time on tools
supporting new technolgies is 5 years or more for any kind of saturation. But at some level, I
applaud the question - can we do better? From: COUTHURES
Alain [mailto:alain.couthures@agencexml.com]
Even though it's always good to think
about how to improve namespaces, how long would we have to wait for such a new
mechanism to be widely available ? Don't we need solutions for today ? Interesting idea. This is
likely something that has to be addressed in an Xml track. I am not sure
that HTML-5 is even an Xml track? For a number of use cases
I have seen namespaces work. They are integrated in most Xml p But how well they address
all use cases I do not know. I would be interested to hear about use
cases where Xml namespaces fail and rough sketches of better technologies. Jim From: Michael
Kay [mailto:mike@saxonica.com]
> There's
supposed to be an extensibility workshop in September at one of the F2Fs where namespaces
in general will be hashed out - I plan to be monitoring that one carefully, as
I suspect that there will be a move to "fix" namespaces in a way that
will have long term negative repercussions for the XML community. Let's approach this
positively. XML namespaces are a pretty awful piece of design. Perhaps
this is an opportunity to revisit the requirement and do something a bit more
elegant. Regards, |