• To: "Gavin Thomas Nicol" <gtn@r...>,<xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: Re: AF and namespaces, once again (was Re: [xml-dev ] There is a m eaning, but it's not in the data alone)
• From: "Danny Ayers" <danny666@v...>
• Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 02:09:36 +0100
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <E16UNMK-0006B4-00@s...>

>On Friday 25 January 2002 03:22 pm, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
>> You go a bit further and require multiple semantics and that
>> the instance should be able to tell the system which semantics
>> it can be used with.
>
>Some people would claim that this is what namespaces do.
>
>I don't think the document is the place to specify the sets of 
>applicable semantics. 

By supplying namespaces, aren't you doing exactly that?

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Re: AF and namespaces, once again (was Re: [xml-dev ] There is a m eaning, but it's not in the data alone)
    • From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@r...>

• References:
  • Re: Re: AF and namespaces, once again (was Re: [xml-dev ] There is a m eaning, but it's not in the data alone)
    • From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@r...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Generality of HTTP
• Next by Date: XMLNoteTree looking for something to do
• Previous by thread: Re: Re: AF and namespaces, once again (was Re: [xml-dev ] There is a m eaning, but it's not in the data alone)
• Next by thread: Re: Re: AF and namespaces, once again (was Re: [xml-dev ] There is a m eaning, but it's not in the data alone)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread