Arjun Ray wrote:
>
> "Simon St.Laurent" <> wrote:
>
> | It seems like namespaces aimed at diambiguation with the "let's create
> | big long names" approach, and then had to abbreviate the big long names
> | to keep the language usable.
>
> Basically, yes. The inveterate metaphysical babbling about "global
> uniqueness" or whatever is just smoke to make up for the lack of a fire.
could someone explain how the "generic vocabulary combination" problem would
be any different if the given initial logical document were encoded as
<zero>
<one><twelve>Book Review<twelve></one>
<two>
<three>
<four>XML: A Primer</four>
<five>
<six align="center">
<seven>Author</seven><seven>Price</seven>
<seven>Pages</seven><seven>Date</seven>
</six>
<six align="left">
<seven><eight>Simon St. Laurent</eight></seven>
<seven><nine>31.98</nine></seven>
<seven><ten>352</ten></seven>
<seven><eleven>1998/01</eleven></seven>
</six>
</five>
</three>
</two>
</zero>
or as
<zero>
<one><two>Book Review<two></one>
<two>
<three>
<four>XML: A Primer</four>
<five>
<six align="center">
<seven>Author</seven><seven>Price</seven>
<seven>Pages</seven><seven>Date</seven>
</six>
<six align="left">
<seven><eight>Simon St. Laurent</eight></seven>
<seven><nine>31.98</nine></seven>
<seven><ten>352</ten></seven>
<seven><eleven>1998/01</eleven></seven>
</six>
</five>
</three>
</two>
</zero>
or even as
<zero>
<one><one>Book Review<one></one>
<two>
<one>
<one>XML: A Primer</one>
<two>
<one align="center">
<one>Author</one><one>Price</one>
<one>Pages</one><one>Date</one>
</one>
<one align="left">
<one><one>Simon St. Laurent</one></one>
<one><two>31.98</two></one>
<one><three>352</three></one>
<one><four>1998/01</four></one>
</one>
</two>
</one>
</two>
</zero>
that is, absent even the attribute-encoded identifiers introduced in the
xml-map example.
and why it would be the same problem if the document were encoded as
<zero>
<one><one>Book Review<one></one>
<one>
<one>
<one>XML: A Primer</one>
<one>
<one align="center">
<one>Author</one><one>Price</one>
<one>Pages</one><one>Date</one>
</one>
<one align="left">
<one><one>Simon St. Laurent</one></one>
<one><two>31.98</two></one>
<one><three>352</three></one>
<one><four>1998/01</four></one>
</one>
</one>
</one>
</one>
</zero>
absent a clear explanation, it would be more productive to leave namespaces
out of the discussion.
> [... xml-map example ...]
>
> | The problem comes about if you tried to combine RSS with another XML
> | vocabulary whose elements also resided in the nil namespace.
>
> No problem as long as markup is used to tell the difference. Heck, that's
> what markup is for!
>
> The interesting fact is that not only are colons or multi-part names not
> needed for this,
then leave them out of the its discussion.
> but also such syntactically intrusive devices can
> complicate or preclude solving the problem in the general case.
i don't recall you mentioning this issue before. examples please. i
implemented the xml-map mechanism as initially proposed. it's a while back,
but my recollection is that it was a strictly post-interned-names operation.
which means completely unlrelated to any namespace-related operations and/or
lexical properties.
>
> In fact, I've demonstrated a class of methods (using control attributes)
> to solve these problems:
>
> 1. Allow any vocabulary to be mapped to any partition of the document.
> 2. Allow this for multiple vocabularies uniformly, catering to both
> exclusion and overlap.
>
> Not just that, I've done it with nary a colonified name in sight. Never
> mind that I don't even have "xlink:href versus html:src" problems here!
>
> And for that, I'm supposed to be a troll? Sheesh.
then leave namespaces out of the discussions. if one insists on bringing in
something which is not technically relevant, the reader wonders if the
motivations are technical or rhetorical.
...
