• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: namespace reprise
• From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 18:14:48 -0400
• In-reply-to: <8BD7226E07DDFF49AF5EF4030ACE0B7E0696F80C@r...>

> I'd be more interested in someone who can point out the the difficulty
> caused by namespaces in XML that don't boil down to philosophical or
> aesthetic arguments. 

Right, right.  There's no problem there, really.  It's just "philosophy"
and "aesthetics" on which we've wasted the past four years.

The wisdom of:
* Scoped attribute declarations
* URIs as name components
* QNames in general
* attributes left out of the default namespace

is just so obvious, that what were we thinking?  (I'm sure I left
something out of that list.)

I really hope Tyler Baker has found something better to think about.


-------------
Simon St.Laurent - SSL is my TLA
http://simonstl.com may be my URI
http://monasticxml.org may be my ascetic URI
urn:oid:1.3.6.1.4.1.6320 is another possibility altogether

• References:
  • RE: namespace reprise
    • From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...>

• Prev by Date: RE: namespace reprise
• Next by Date: RE: namespace reprise
• Previous by thread: RE: namespace reprise
• Next by thread: Re: namespace reprise
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread