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

Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)

• To: uche.ogbuji@f...
• Subject: Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
• From: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>
• Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2002 11:04:27 +0100
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <E17aUQ5-0005L1-00@m...> (message from Uche Ogbuji onThu, 01 Aug 2002 22:51:48 -0600)
• References: <E17aUQ5-0005L1-00@m...>

> If your reasoning were to be followed, then the nasty SOAP and XSD
> pattern of  non-namespaced child elements would make sense, and I
> can't accept that. 

I made a statement about attributes (actually I just quoted one from the
namespace spec) so i fail to see how you can infer anything about
elements from that statement. (And I agree with you, the XSD
default behaviour of non-namespaced elements is dire)



> Since, as you say, the *only* reasin to give something a namespace is
> to allow  it to be inserted willy-nilly into other vocabularies.

the namespace spec clearly states that giving something a global name
although that provides a mechanism to refer to attributes/elements makes
no statements about whether it is "proper usage" to do so in any
particular case. So whether another vocabulary allows a reference
to such an attribute is explictly not an issue here. 


> This specification makes no assertions as to the proper usage of such
> attributes. The combination of the namespace name and the attribute
> name uniquely identifies the global attribute.


David

_____________________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet
delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further
information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp or alternatively call
Star Internet for details on the Virus Scanning Service.

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
    • From: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@f...>

• References:
  • Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
    • From: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@f...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Markup perspective not code (wasRE: Re: URIs, concrete)
• Next by Date: RE: Markup perspective not code (wasRE: Re: URIs, concrete)
• Previous by thread: Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
• Next by thread: Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread