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

Re: Vocabulary Combination and optional namespaces

• To: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
• Subject: Re: Vocabulary Combination and optional namespaces
• From: Joe Gregorio <joe@b...>
• Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 00:02:25 -0400
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <3ED676DF.6020707@p...>
• References: <ab7bdvs3gol4j4trlefsiq6g4bfbaou70f@4...> <3ED5B096.9080102@t...> <3ED6062E.4080403@b...> <3ED676DF.6020707@p...>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130

Paul Prescod wrote:
> Joe Gregorio wrote:
>>
>>   <rss version="2.0">
>>      <channel>
>>          <title>...
> 
> 
> This could be written:
> 
>    <rss version="2.0" xmlns="http:../rss">
>       <channel>
>           <title>...
> 
> It is just a few more characters per document and NO prefixes. It also 
> makes the document more self-describing and provides a built-in link to 
> the documentation page. What's not to love?

Because those few more characters alter the
processing requirements of those receiving the document.
I agree completely with Joe English's response on this.

> 
>> I have also run into such a need in other cases, for example
>> I have worked with a group that is, at best, namespace allergic.
> 
> 
> Anybody who is so namespace allergic that they cannot add a single 
> "xmlns" attribute to their document is, in my opinion, trying to make 
> life difficult for others, not trying to make life easy for themselves.

I'm not in a position to coerce, nor to judge.

> One "con" is that there is a perfectly good solution in the XML 
> namespaces specification. Another "con" is that XPaths into documents 
> with namespaces are different than those without, schemas for documents 
> with namespaces are different than those without, XSLT templates are 
> different etc. etc. Supporting the namespace and no-namespace versions 
> will be a hassle in many contexts.

True, but the context really is different between the namespaced
and non-namespaced versions. In one the document is embedded and
in the other it is not. For most cases I would think that the
different contexts would require different XPath using code,
different XSLT templates, etc. On the otherhand, differing
Schema might be a problem and I don't know enough about Schema to
weigh the impact.

	Thanks,
	-joe

-- 
http://BitWorking.org
http://WellFormedWeb.org

• 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: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Vocabulary Combination and optional namespaces
• Next by Date: Re: Vocabulary Combination and optional namespaces
• Previous by thread: Pay no attention to the URI behind the curtain
• Next by thread: Re: Vocabulary Combination and optional namespaces
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread