[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
Re: [xml-dev] What's wrong with namespaces? Some observations andsuggestions
- From: Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>
- To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
- Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2010 23:24:22 +0000
On 04/12/2010 01:34, Amelia A Lewis wrote:
> Heyo.
>
> So, I've been (recently, publicly) critical of the Namespaces in XML
> specification. My summary version: when I try to teach someone who
> doesn't care about XML about XML APIs, it's namespaces where they
> Boggle and Fall Down.
I agree with this analyssis.
Elements should have simple (string-valued) names, using hierarchic
naming to achieve uniqueness, and context-sensitive abbreviation to
achieve conciseness. It should always be legitimate to use the full name
if abbreviation is not wanted.
Hierarchic naming: for example an element might be called
:org.w3c.html.table.
Abbreviation: this might be abbreviated to "table". How is the
abbreviated name resolved? Using the hierarchic name of the parent
element. So the outermost element gives the full name
<:org.w3c.html.html>
and inner elements can use abbreviated names if they are in the same
"namespace":
<:org.w3c.html.html>
<head>
<title>...</title>
</head>
<body>
<:org.w3c.svg.svg>
<rectangle>
....
Of course, this is hopelessly incompatible. Or is it? One could devise a
transition mechanism. If we see something like
<xsl:stylesheet xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform";
version="2.0">
then we could regard that as merely a quaint old-fashioned way of saying
<:org.w3c.www.1999.XSL.Transform.stylesheet version="2.0">
Hierarchic naming with optional abbreviation works so well across so
many branches of computing, and indeed real life (for example phone
numbers); it's a tragedy that it wasn't adopted from the start.
Michael Kay
Saxonica
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
