Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Re: URIs, concrete
 I don't think anybody would deliberately create <x:foo bar="junk" x:bar="junque"> It's likely to appear in the same way as x:foo and y:foo -- the merging in one document of two vocabularies that share terminology but give it different usage (or have different contexts for using the same terminology). Just as a single document, over its evolution and integration of several subdocuments, may wind up using both x:foo and y:foo, a single element may evolve to needing both x:bar and y:bar attributes. This is precisely what XML Namespaces are supposed to enable us to deal with -- Namespaces provide a path of least resistance and a consistent model for doing so. If it makes sense for elements, why not for attributes? This is not to say that given a chance to redesign the document or its constituent subdocs, you wouldn't change one of the vocabularies or provide a synonym for y:bar so you could avoid the confusion, or introduce some kind of transformation in combining the subdocs, but to the extent that you're locked in to existing vocabularies and have large volumes of documents to deal with, the difference between bar and x:bar and y:bar might be important to you. It would be nice to be able to indicate that the difference doesn't matter and be able to work as Simon suggests. This could be done as a feature of the processing application (similar to the SAX features) or via a PI, or some other means. Jeff 
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! 
Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||
