• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• To: Mike Sharp <msharp@l...>
• Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 14:17:06 -0500

I asked this same question some months back.  
It should be in the archives somewhere.  Tim 
Bray and others responded.  In one case it comes down 
to whether or not mapping to associative array 
names (eg, the obj.thang) will 
conflict.  Otherwise, it is an acceptable practice 
because as always

XML Doesn't Care.


Len Bullard
Intergraph Public Safety
clbullar@i...
http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard

Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h


-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Sharp [mailto:msharp@l...]
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 1:05 PM
To: xml-dev@l...
Subject: Q: Tag naming convention




I have generally tried to avoid the use of tagnames like <first.name>,
because
in my limited experience, the middle tier maps object attributes to tag
names,
and having a period in the name messes everything up.

The other day I ran across a book in use locally that uses LOTS of element
names
in this fashion.

I was wondering if this practice has anything to recommend it.  If not,
should
it's use be discouraged?


Regards,
Mike Sharp

• Prev by Date: ATTLIST question
• Next by Date: GUI XML Editing tools
• Previous by thread: ATTLIST question
• Next by thread: RE: Tag naming convention
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread