[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: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 18:33:24 -0400 (EDT)

Tim Berners-Lee writes:

 > The namespaces spec doesn't tell you how to describe the
 > meaning of a name. But that does *not* mean that it should have none.

But I didn't suggest that at all (sorry for any confusion) -- I merely
suggested that the Namespace-qualified name itself is just a
signifier.  The signified is something and somewhere else.  I'm fairly 
certain that we agree on this point.


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:
  • Signifiers/Namespaces (was Re: Another look at namespaces)
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• References:
  • Re: Another look at namespaces
    • From: "Tim Berners-Lee" <timbl@w...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Another look at namespaces
• Next by Date: RE: A compromise?
• Previous by thread: Re: Another look at namespaces
• Next by thread: Signifiers/Namespaces (was Re: Another look at namespaces)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread