RE: Rethinking namespaces, attribute remapping (was Re:[xml-de
SECURITY/PRIVACY: HLink requires you to fetch a mapping file from a specified remote location while XLink does not. Any web page that can make your browser make HTTP requests other than the ones directly specified by the user are potential security and privacy issues. For instance, I can imagine WebBugs going upscale and dressing themselves up to look legit by using HLink. SELF-CONTAINED INFORMATION: In disconnected scenarios or situations where the document is being read by a human all the information about the document is not readily available. Thus complete processing cannot be done on such a document without retrieving more documents which may or may not be available (network issues for instance). Also how will such practices affect consumers of XML documents like XQuery, XSLT, XInclude, in a manner that doesn't lead to confusion and complexity? -----Original Message----- From: Mike Champion [mailto:mc@x...] Sent: Fri 9/27/2002 7:49 AM To: xml-dev@l... Cc: Subject: RE: Rethinking namespaces, attribute remapping (was Re: TAG on HLink) 9/27/2002 10:10:40 AM, "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...> wrote: >2.) The HLink way > ><html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" hlink:definition=http://www.example.org/whatever... >Advantages: Modular, easy for Joe Blow to use without understanding how it works >Disadvantages: Security issues, What are the security issues that HLink raises but XLink (or some other "colonified" syntax) doesn't? > information necessary to process document no longer self contained Hmm, I'm not sure what this means. Still I can see some distinct advantages for Namespaces 1.0 in EXTREMELY loosely coupled environments such as the RSS weblog syndication world (makes the TAG list fireworks seem sedate!) where there are no real authorities and all sorts of quasi-standards, but few take the boring details of the quasi-standards all that seriously. Being able to distinguish "<p> for paragraph" from "<p> for pontification" [in my private vocabulary :-) ] in a "self contained" manner lets people downstream handle what they understand and quietly ignore what they don't. I don't know how that would work in a non-colonified name-remapping technology (which is why I'd like to see this dicussion happen!). > XHTML which is intended for use by non-technical people in a simple and straightforward manner > without placing undue cognitive load. That's the whole point, at least assuming for the sake of argument that Pemberton, Dubinko et al. are right and Harold is wrong about XLink's extreme verbosity and potential for confusion in the XHTML context. (Micah's "Offering" on xml.com is an absolute must-read!). "Undue cognitive load" means that only experts and those assisted by tools can produce useful documents. Those of us who get paid to write, debug, test, or explain the tools sometimes forget that the NECESSITY for tools is not a universally appreciated blessing. ----------------------------------------------------------------- The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
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