• To: ricko@a... (Rick Jelliffe)
• Subject: Re: How to get realistic expectations for Namespaces (was Best Practice = Vanilla XML? )
• From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
• Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 17:04:30 -0400 (EDT)
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <030b01c24a1f$0d3c9170$4bc8a8c0@A...> from "Rick Jelliffe" at Aug 23, 2002 07:01:14 AM

Rick Jelliffe scripsit:

> For example, apart from the xml: and xmlns: built-in namespaces, has there
> even been any QNamed attributes that have succeeded?  Or any
> QNamed inline elements (not having an ancestor in the same namespace)?

It's not the case that XML vocabularies "succeed" if and only if they have
a huge public practice.  Reuters Health articles embed an rdf:Description
element into html:head, and this "succeeds" in the sense that our
customers successfully figure out what to do with it.  We supply a DTD
(and any other schema type on demand, but no demand yet) specifying how
to mix the subset of XHTML with the subset of RDF that we use.

-- 
John Cowan       http://www.ccil.org/~cowan        <jcowan@r...>
        You tollerday donsk?  N.  You tolkatiff scowegian?  Nn.
        You spigotty anglease?  Nnn.  You phonio saxo?  Nnnn.
                Clear all so!  `Tis a Jute.... (Finnegans Wake 16.5)

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: How to get realistic expectations for Namespaces (was Best Practice = Vanilla XML? )
    • From: "Jeff Rafter" <jeffrafter@d...>

• References:
  • How to get realistic expectations for Namespaces (was Best Practice = Vanilla XML? )
    • From: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@a...>

• Prev by Date: How to get realistic expectations for Namespaces (was Best Practice = Vanilla XML? )
• Next by Date: Re: How to get realistic expectations for Namespaces (was Best Practice = Vanilla XML? )
• Previous by thread: How to get realistic expectations for Namespaces (was Best Practice = Vanilla XML? )
• Next by thread: Re: How to get realistic expectations for Namespaces (was Best Practice = Vanilla XML? )
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread