Re: [xml-dev] Venetian Blinds vs Garden of Eden patterns for industry st

["Pete Cordell" <petexmldev@codalogic.com>]

Original Message From: "David Carlisle"
>
> On 28/10/2010 18:30, Pete Cordell wrote:
>> "put this funny prefix on the first element, and the odd attribute in
>> the start and then you don't have to worry about XML namespaces anymore"
>> seems like a big win.
>
>
> But if you put all the elements in the same namespace the same would be 
> true except there would be far less namespace problems to worry about, 
> What you refer to as an "xpath issue" isn't really anything to do with 
> namespaces it is just the extra complication introduced by having two 
> namespaces (or rather a namespace and the no-namespace) rather than the 
> much simpler and more common choice of having all the related elements in 
> the same namespace.


My personal take is that namespaces are good for all the reasons that 
namespaces are useful in other programming contexts.  Among these are the 
ability to re-use types defined in separate standard (for some definition of 
standard) type libraries.  But just because your schema uses the 'widget' 
type declared in the 'http://widgetlib.org' namespace shouldn't necessarily 
mean that 'http://widgetlib.org' should appear in your instance documents.

Pete Cordell
Codalogic Ltd
Interface XML to C++ the easy way using C++ XML
data binding to convert XSD schemas to C++ classes.
Visit http://codalogic.com/lmx/ or http://www.xml2cpp.com
for more info