[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
Correct usage of the terms "bind", "binding", "bound", "in"?
- From: "Costello, Roger L." <costello@mitre.org>
- To: "xml-dev@lists.xml.org" <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
- Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 06:00:54 -0400
David Carlisle made this excellent statement:
> since a namespace is (presumably) a space (set) of names, it makes more
> sense to talk of names being in the namespace than bound to it.
> The prefix on the other hand isn't in the namespace but just
> associated (bound) to it in each instance document.
The lesson I learned from David's statement is this:
Things outside of a set are said to
be "bound" (associated) to the set.
Correct?
Consider this instance document element:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
<bk:ISBN xmlns:bk="http://www.books.org">978-0-9844425-0-8</bk:ISBN>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
I have learned from our discussions that this is correct terminology:
(a) The namespace prefix "bk" is _bound_ to the namespace http://www.books.org
(b) The name "ISBN" is _in_ the namespace http://www.books.org
QUESTION
What is the correct terminology when talking about the markup and the value "978-0-9844425-0-8"?
"978-0-9844425-0-8" is just one of a set of values. The markup is associated to that particular value.
Is this correct terminology:
{http://www.books.org}ISBN is _bound_ to "978-0-9844425-0-8"
/Roger
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]