Ah, POND. Dim recollections; although I think I missed this post, I seem to
recall you bringing up the acronym on a few occasions.
Looks like you're using the outer-most namespace as the "true" namespace,
with the inner namespaces used for type identification. That's a fourth
approach to signifying standard types that I could add to the three I posted
earlier.
When good ideas go bad, bad ideas sound better.
-- Jeff
"No more Schema,
No more tools,
No more dirty parsing rules."
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:]
> Sent: Monday, February 02, 2004 12:59 PM
> To:
> Subject: WARNING: Namespace thread virus (new variant?)
>
> I mentioned something like this long ago at:
>
> http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/200212/msg00443.html
>
