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

Re: Can we treat XML elements and attributes as sets

• To: Elliotte Harold <elharo@m...>, Michael Kay <mike@s...>
• Subject: Re: Can we treat XML elements and attributes as sets
• From: Mukul Gandhi <mukul_gandhi@y...>
• Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2005 07:17:21 -0700 (PDT)
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=1EJT3TtV//exrcqy9TDUmH/ssnOXOPQi/H2a3pdpwmzjnLZlxE2qAB3fNbrfEdciig7Hr7jxNOSTNhvP1cY1cb+WoknK+pS2LtbJJ9ZqqbeRaafzjt5v3oFvjCDqu/twuNKnGdNMTpNI3XZSdNIqtBAwAbWjegVms+ztYQGCFoQ= ;
• In-reply-to: <430877F5.50005@m...>

Thank you Mr. Harold for your comments. I feel the
change you are proposing to the relevant text is
perfectly all right.

I wanted to express my gratitude to you, for your
excellent book "XML in a Nutshell".

Thanks!
Regards,
Mukul

--- Elliotte Harold <elharo@m...> wrote:

> Looking at that particular paragraph right now (p.
> 63) it doesn't seem 
> precise enough. It should be clearer that it's
> talking about element and 
> attribute names rather than element and attribute
> instances, though I 
> suspect that can be gathered from context. That
> whole sentence about 
> "The URIs partition the element names and attributes
> into disjoint sets. 
> " could be deleted without losing anything.
> 
> The bit about the 1-1 relationship between
> namespaces and XML 
> applications is also too strong. It completely
> misses the existence of 
> numerous different XML applications that have no
> namespace, or that are 
> in the null namespace if you prefer.
> 
> I'd used an example of genuine mathematical sets a
> little earlier in the 
> chapter so I probably had sets on the brain when I
> wrote that. I'll see 
> if I can clean this up in the next printing. How
> about this:
> 
> Namespaces distinguish between elements with
> different meanings but the 
> same name by assigning each element a URI.
> Generally, all the elements 
> from one XML application are assigned to one URI,
> and all the elements 
> from a different XML application are assigned to a
> different URI. These 
> URIs are called namespace names. Elements with the
> same name but 
> different URIs are different kinds of elements.
> Elements with the same 
> name and the same URI are the same kind of element.
> Most of the time a 
> single XML application has a single namespace URI
> for all its elements, 
> though a few applications use multiple namespaces to
> subdivide different 
> parts of the application. For instance, XSL uses
> different namespaces 
> for XSL Transformations (XSLT) and XSL Formatting
> Objects (XSL-FO).
> 
> I think that eliminates most of the pretentious
> pseudo-math I sometimes 
> slip into.
> 
> -- 
> Elliotte Rusty Harold  elharo@m...
> XML in a Nutshell 3rd Edition Just Published!
> http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/xian3/
>
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0596007647/cafeaulaitA/ref=nosim



		
____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs 
 

• References:
  • Re: Can we treat XML elements and attributes as sets
    • From: Elliotte Harold <elharo@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Can we treat XML elements and attributes as sets
• Next by Date: RE: Can we treat XML elements and attributes as sets
• Previous by thread: Re: Can we treat XML elements and attributes as sets
• Next by thread: Re: Can we treat XML elements and attributes as sets
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread