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

Re: Vocabulary Combination and optional namespaces

• To: xml-dev <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: Vocabulary Combination and optional namespaces
• From: Arjun Ray <aray@n...>
• Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 19:38:31 +0000
• In-reply-to: <3ED75D63.FB992B7F@s...>
• References: <ab7bdvs3gol4j4trlefsiq6g4bfbaou70f@4...> <3ED5B096.9080102@t...> <3ED6062E.4080403@b...> <002801c325e8$9b883060$a000a8c0@SeairthA31> <3ED61653.20209@b...> <umsddv448lhhshot9gjlge6fivn46elk1a@4...> <3ED75D63.FB992B7F@s...>

james anderson <james.anderson@s...> wrote:
| Arjun Ray wrote:

| could someone explain how the "generic vocabulary combination" problem 
| would be any different if the given initial logical document were encoded 
| as [...] that is, absent even the attribute-encoded identifiers introduced 
| in the xml-map example.

No different.  Exactly the same considerations apply.  A name mapping is
always necessary, between the arbitrary names an author could use and the
"well-known" (or externally predefined) ones he may wind up using.  The
single well-known vocabulary case is then merely an "identity mapping",
which would need no explicit control information given a set of reasonable
defaulting rules.  Basically, use explicit control attributes only when
you have to: the document instance as context determines how and to what
extent. 

It's a matter of giving document authors means to express what they want,
not of imposing externally predetermined usages on them (such as "you
gotta use xlink:href instead of html:src!") 

|> The interesting fact is that not only are colons or multi-part names not
|> needed for this,
| 
| then leave them out of the its discussion.

I would, except that all too often colonification is catechistically
trotted out as the "solution", when in fact it isn't.

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Vocabulary Combination and optional namespaces
    • From: james anderson <james.anderson@s...>

• References:
  • Vocabulary Combination
    • From: Arjun Ray <aray@n...>
  • Re: Vocabulary Combination
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
  • Vocabulary Combination and optional namespaces
    • From: Joe Gregorio <joe@b...>
  • Re: Vocabulary Combination and optional namespaces
    • From: "Seairth Jacobs" <seairth@s...>
  • Re: Vocabulary Combination and optional namespaces
    • From: Joe Gregorio <joe@b...>
  • Re: Vocabulary Combination and optional namespaces
    • From: Arjun Ray <aray@n...>
  • Re: Vocabulary Combination and optional namespaces
    • From: james anderson <james.anderson@s...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Vocabulary Combination
• Next by Date: Re: Vocabulary Combination and optional namespaces
• Previous by thread: Re: Vocabulary Combination and optional namespaces
• Next by thread: Re: Vocabulary Combination and optional namespaces
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread