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

Re: How about over 1,000,000 XHTML Namespace URIs?

• From: "Trevor Croll" <litebook@p...>
• To: <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Thu, 2 Sep 1999 12:37:39 +1000

More examples of the cheap winning over the better are:

 The IBM XT PC - 8bit with 16 bit external processor won over the 32bit
Motorolla, Zilog, and other processors that were much better with superior
hardware and operating systems that were more expensive.

People punished themselves with MS-DOS for 10 years when Apple MAC users
 were using WINDOWS???
 DOS systems were cheap and widely available and open.

 The cheap and easy to get MS DOS beat CP/M, UNIX, MUFO, MUMPS, PICK, .....
 as an operating system of choice.
 MS Word beat Word perfect because of the dominance of MS-DOS and Windows
and
 Microsoft.

 History shows that the simple and low cost beats the complex every time.

 The DODO was a bird that lived on a pacific Island, It became big, lost its
 ability to fly, and became extinct. -- This is the lesson the W3C should
 keep in mind.


----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
To: XML-Dev Mailing list <xml-dev@i...>
Sent: Thursday, September 02, 1999 11:08 AM
Subject: Re: How about over 1,000,000 XHTML Namespace URIs?


> David Megginson wrote:
> >
> > What happens when a vendor wants to create a new element that will
> > appear in, say, an HTML paragraph?  Obviously the new element itself
> > (such as <ms:spreadsheet> or <ra:videoclip>) will have to be in a
> > different Namespace -- that's the whole point -- but will the
> > containing paragraph have to be in a different Namespace as well?
>
> Today? Yes. XHTML is not designed nor defined to allow other element
> types to be mixed in nor to BE mixed in.
>
> Tomorrow, XHTML is supposed to be defined to be extensible. Then a
> single namespace (and schema) will be sufficient.
>
> The problem is that people want to act as if it is extensible today
> which it is clearly not (name notwithstandaing). Ading a namespace to
> something doesn't magically make it into something that can be mixed
> into other DTDs.
>
>  Paul Prescod
>
> 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...)
>
>


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...)

• References:
  • RE: why distinctions within XHTML?
    • From: "Hunter, David" <dhunter@M...>
  • How about over 1,000,000 XHTML Namespace URIs?
    • From: David Megginson <david@m...>
  • Re: How about over 1,000,000 XHTML Namespace URIs?
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Why namespaces?
• Next by Date: RE: How about over 1,000,000 XHTML Namespace URIs?
• Previous by thread: Re: How about over 1,000,000 XHTML Namespace URIs?
• Next by thread: RE: why distinctions within XHTML?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread