Re: [xml-dev] MicroXML

[Uche Ogbuji <uche@ogbuji.net>]

On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 8:30 AM, Andrew Welch <andrew.j.welch@gmail.com> wrote:

>> ...I think everyone takes "XML" to mean "XML 1.0 + XML Namespaces" so
>> to say something is a "subset of XML" but not mean namespaces you
>> might get done for false advertising :)
>
> Absolutely not.  XML is XML.  Possibly casual observers might confuse "XML"
> with "XML 1.0 + XML Namespaces" but a FAQ is all that's needed to sort that
> out.

Eh?  I must have missed something.  It sounds like you are saying only
a casual observer would think "XML" includes namespaces?

Yes.  I am.

 

> For me (and for quite a few who have spoken up on the list, putting paid to
> your "everyone" claim), exactly what is needed is something "designed to be
> a subset of XML 1.0 but not of XML 1.0 + XML Namespaces."

Again I don't follow.  I'm suggesting dropping namespaces completely
from the subset.

I'd be fine with dropping namespaces completely, but I don't think that would work without some sort of micro-declaration language, as Henri Sivonen's post about xhtml:script reminds us.  I'd prefer some sort of simple typing mechanism (true general typing NOT monolithic data typing nonsense)  over any form of namespaces.  HLink comes to mind, but I'd say even simpler.  And yes, I see Architectural Forms as a style of general typing.  Something along the lines of AFng, but simpler would also work for me.


-- 
Uche Ogbuji                       http://uche.ogbuji.net
Weblog: http://copia.ogbuji.net
Poetry ed @TNB: http://www.thenervousbreakdown.com/author/uogbuji/
Founding Partner, Zepheira        http://zepheira.com
Linked-in: http://www.linkedin.com/in/ucheogbuji
Articles: http://uche.ogbuji.net/tech/publications/
Friendfeed: http://friendfeed.com/uche
Twitter: http://twitter.com/uogbuji
http://www.google.com/profiles/uche.ogbuji