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

RE: misprocessing namespaces (was Re: There is a mea

• To: 'Jonathan Borden' <jborden@m...>, Mike Champion <mc@x...>, The Deviants <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: misprocessing namespaces (was Re: There is a meaning, but it's not in the data alone)
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 15:21:16 -0600

Again, multiple representations, one of the reasons XSLT solves a 
lot of problems of portability if not interoperability.  Mapping 
does not solve problems of semantic inconsistency.  It hides it 
until something critical fails.  Humans are great onsite problem 
solvers.

len

-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Borden [mailto:jborden@m...]

Terseness aside, there is something to be said for human readability, and
problems with prefixes aside, people are drawn to qnames because they are
easy to read, especially if you use a well-known prefix.

• Prev by Date: Re: misprocessing namespaces (was Re: There is a meaning, but it's not in the data alone)
• Next by Date: RE: Co-operating with Architectural Forms
• Previous by thread: RE: ignoring elements in certain namespace in schema?
• Next by thread: RE: misprocessing namespaces (was Re: There is a meaning, but it's not in the data alone)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread