• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Generality of HTTP
• From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@r...>
• Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 11:52:02 -0500
• In-reply-to: <5.1.0.14.0.20020122103738.01aa81d8@mailhost>
• Organization: Red Bridge Interactive, Inc.
• References: <002901c1a2b5$bb13c5a0$0301a8c0@n...> <5.1.0.14.0.20020122103738.01aa81d8@mailhost>

On Tuesday 22 January 2002 05:56 am, John Aldridge wrote:
> But XML is often used in a publishing context, rather than a
> point-to-point messaging context, and explicit private semantic
> agreements are neither possible nor necessary. A tacet agreement to
> use the meanings defined by the owner of a namespace is perfectly
> workable.

OTOH, you don't need namespaces if you agree on the tags...

Alpha-renaming is useful, but not necessary, and not necessary to 
standardize.

• References:
  • Re: Generality of HTTP
    • From: "Jonathan Borden" <jborden@m...>
  • RE: Generality of HTTP
    • From: John Aldridge <john.aldridge@i...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Better is better
• Next by Date: Re: Better is better
• Previous by thread: RE: Generality of HTTP
• Next by thread: RE: Generality of HTTP
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread