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

RE: WD for Namespaces 1.1

• To: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Subject: RE: WD for Namespaces 1.1
• From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Date: 04 Apr 2002 13:59:10 -0500
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <2C61CCE8A870D211A523080009B94E4306FEEAE2@HQ5>
• References: <2C61CCE8A870D211A523080009B94E4306FEEAE2@HQ5>

On Thu, 2002-04-04 at 12:30, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
> The point is not pessimistic; it is conservative. 
> It is based on prior experience with the W3C 
> specification process.  Namespaces are a good 
> example.  
> 
> First, they were just name disambiguators, hidden 
> system properties, then schema references, making them 
> part of the content.  We seem to stay on the 
> slippery slope of minimalism and incomplete 
> design guidelines.  That makes these processes 
> unreliable.  

I have to share Len's concerns about the slippery slope here, especially
given (unofficial, but deeply misguided IMHO) postings like:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2002Mar/0016.html

The "need for speed" in namespace dereferencing?  Scares me pretty
thoroughly and makes me wonder whether namespaces were a good idea yet
again.

> So experience says, don't believe or trust; 
> specify, verify, and hold 
> to the original agreement until a case is 
> made for change which adds value, not simply 
> specification compression.  

"Trust but verify" doesn't seem to be enough these days.

-- 
Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: WD for Namespaces 1.1
    • From: Ronald Bourret <rpbourret@r...>

• References:
  • RE: WD for Namespaces 1.1
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>

• Prev by Date: RE: WD for Namespaces 1.1
• Next by Date: RE: WD for Namespaces 1.1
• Previous by thread: RE: WD for Namespaces 1.1
• Next by thread: Re: WD for Namespaces 1.1
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread