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

Re: Namespaces Best Practice

• From: Jonathan Borden <jborden@m...>
• To: Evan Lenz <elenz@x...>, xml-dev@l...
• Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 15:47:23 -0400

Evan Lenz wrote:

> Jonathan Borden wrote:
>
> > 1) and 2) are related. Taken together, a document composed of elements
> > qualified by multiple namespaces should have a single
> > _unprefixed_ namespace
> > and multiple prefixed namespaces.
>
> Shouldn't this be labeled convention #3? There's nothing in #1 or #2 that
> would forbid me from *always* using prefixes, right?

Sure. Perhaps better "should have at most a single unprefixed namespace ..."

> In any case, I would
> personally be more neutral on whether people should or shouldn't use a
> default namespace. It seems to be neither here nor there

Right, I don't mean to suggest that default namespaces must be used, rather
that each prefix (or lack of prefix) should specify _exactly one_ namespace
in each document. More strongly one should not mix qualified unprefixed
elements (i.e. default namespace) with unqualified elements (no namespace).

Jonathan

• References:
  • RE: Namespaces Best Practice
    • From: Evan Lenz <elenz@x...>

• Prev by Date: Re: infinite depth to namespaces
• Next by Date: open, closed, "SGML for the Web"
• Previous by thread: RE: Namespaces Best Practice
• Next by thread: Re: Namespaces Best Practice
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread