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

Re: Namespaces alternative? (was Re:WD for Namespaces 1.1)

• To: xml-dev <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: Namespaces alternative? (was Re:WD for Namespaces 1.1)
• From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>
• Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2002 12:14:43 -0400
• In-reply-to: <003c01c1df14$afe05860$6400a8c0@seairthlaptop>

4/8/2002 11:47:27 AM, "Seairth Jacobs" <seairth@s...> wrote:

>
>So the reality is that this is just too much of a paradigm shift for anyone
>to really feel that it is worth taking on...  ah well...  back to the
>drawing board.

Perhaps.  Sorry for the digression, but the whole POINT of a "paradigm" (going back 
to Thomas Kuhn) is that it frees up "normal" people from having to think about the 
big picture and imponderable questions so that they can get on with their work.  XML 
is beginning to look like it actually has a paradigm -- and even Schematron, RNG, 
etc. fit into the namespaces part reasonably easily.  Most people would rather learn 
to deal with a klunky paradigm than to think about imponderables, so you definitely 
have an uphill battle!

So, will XML (either the DTD flavor or the namespaces+schemas flavor, or both) work 
well enough so that ordinary blokes can use it to get their work done without 
pondering the imponderable much of the time?  Will this lead to a viable industry 
with the cruft hidden behind abstraction layers and tools?  We shall see ... if not, 
better ideas will be in demand, but right now we are in a time of more 
consolidation, less innovation, in the XML world.

• References:
  • Re: Namespaces alternative? (was Re:WD for Namespaces 1.1)
    • From: "Seairth Jacobs" <seairth@s...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Namespaces alternative? (was Re:WD for Namespaces 1.1)
• Next by Date: F1 - XSL Precompilation
• Previous by thread: F1 - XSL Precompilation
• Next by thread: ANN: Second Edition of XSLFO Tutorial Materials (XML-DEV)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread