RE: [xml-dev] Pragmatic namespaces

[rjelliffe@allette.com.au]

>> I think the key issue is non-distruptiveness. The XML side
>> won't accept something that is too disruptive on balance
>
> Agreed. My suggestion of a "vocabulary definition" used to resolve
> undeclared prefixes and unprefixed element names was designed with that in
> mind. It would accept the current XML syntax and deliver the current
> infoset.

There has long been a gap for this.

I implemented this kind of thing for one series of Topologi's editors, see
NII
http://www.topologi.com/resources/pdfs/NamedInformationItems.pdf
in particular to have simple annotatable declarations of elements in a
vocabulary in a flat format. It has a myriad of uses.

>> (My own opinion is that this is all a side-effect of the
>> W3C's intense desire to avoid anything like a long-term plan
>> or a co-ordinated strategy.
>
> W3C does not have intense desires. It's a collection of a lot of people
> with different intense desires, working within processes that give each
> of them a voice.

I don't think reason is a proper response to (my) sarcasm and metonymy:
you are affirming my point. There is a waffly long-term mission statement,
dis-coordinated WG scopes, rulings on individual broad issues from TAG,
and nothing binding them together, except perhaps the desire for the
semantic web (or linked data as it is called now.)

Cheers
Rick