• From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@e...>
• To: 'XML-Dev Mailing list' <xml-dev@x...>
• Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 11:21:34 -0700

> > What kind of application can handle this?
> 
> IE5.0 and Office 2000 allow this with HTML, VML and your own custom
> markup.

Very specific kind of application.

> > I'm not saying namespaces are useless, simply that many people don't
> > need them.
> >
> 
> Sigh :-( Why do we always imagine only people using markup.
> Applications need it more then people do.

I'm not assuming people. Again, I've been processing SGML/XML in 
very advanced applications for over 10 years, and I didn't have 
namespaces during that time.

Namespaces are convenient *for some things*, but a lot of usages are
gratuitous.

> On a side note, I still do not understand what the objection to
> namespaces are. Seems to be natural if you came from the object
> oriented crowd, prefixes are natural.

Hey, I used to do alpha-renaming in lisp too.... but they're different
beasts. 

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: power uses of XML vs. simple uses of XML
    • From: Ashvil <ashvil@i...>

• References:
  • RE: power uses of XML vs. simple uses of XML
    • From: "Ashvil" <ashvil@i...>

• Prev by Date: RE: URI concerns continue
• Next by Date: RE: power uses of XML vs. simple uses of XML
• Previous by thread: RE: power uses of XML vs. simple uses of XML
• Next by thread: RE: power uses of XML vs. simple uses of XML
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread