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

Re: Vocabulary Combination

• To: Arjun Ray <aray@n...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Vocabulary Combination
• From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
• Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 01:20:55 -0700
• In-reply-to: <ab7bdvs3gol4j4trlefsiq6g4bfbaou70f@4...>
• References: <ab7bdvs3gol4j4trlefsiq6g4bfbaou70f@4...>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.3a) Gecko/20021212

Arjun Ray wrote:
 > ...
> 
> If this is acceptable, then my question is: What is the decision procedure
> by which a generic parser-level filter could generate these views, if it's
> to take namespaced names as a guide?
> 
> "It can't be done" is an acceptable answer, btw.

There is no global rule about the semantics of embedded namespaces. Any 
rule that handled the book/html case would fall apart in the face of 
XSLT/XSLFO.

That's one of the reasons they were so contraversial all those years 
ago. Nevertheless, they have found widespread use as a trigger for 
specific processors, like XSLT engines. You see them often used to 
introduce a code vs. literal distinction or a "built-in" vs. 
"user-defined" distinction. For instance, if a vocabulary had a 
"CustomProperties" element, it might be defined to allow arbitrary 
attributes but only attributes that are namespace qualified.

  Paul Prescod

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Vocabulary Combination
    • From: Arjun Ray <aray@n...>

• References:
  • Vocabulary Combination
    • From: Arjun Ray <aray@n...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Vocabulary Combination
• Next by Date: Xerces-C 2.2.0 problem
• Previous by thread: Re: Vocabulary Combination
• Next by thread: Re: Vocabulary Combination
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread