[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: Another look at namespaces

• From: David Megginson <david@m...>
• To: "'XML-DEV'" <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 16:10:45 -0400 (EDT)

Don Park writes:

 > I believe that:
 > 
 > 1. A namespace is empty of meaning beyond being distinguishable from other
 > namespaces.
 > 2. A name within a namespace is also meaningless beyond being
 > distinguishable from other names in the namespace.
 > 3. Meaning of a name requires a frame of reference.

I cannot remember Tim Bray's exact wording, but he said something like 
"programs can use qualified names they recognize as triggers for
processing behaviour".  That (or whatever he actually said) is the
best summary of Namespaces that's come out so far.


All the best,


David

-- 
David Megginson                 david@m...
           http://www.megginson.com/

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Another look at namespaces
    • From: james anderson <James.Anderson@m...>

• References:
  • RE: Another look at namespaces
    • From: Andrew Layman <andrewl@m...>
  • RE: Another look at namespaces
    • From: "Don Park" <donpark@d...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Another look at namespaces
• Next by Date: Re: Unicode surrogate block in XML?
• Previous by thread: RE: Another look at namespaces
• Next by thread: Re: Another look at namespaces
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread