[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: What is a namespace ... really?
At 11:52 AM 1/15/99 -0500, david@m... wrote: >Borden, Jonathan writes: > > > I don't see a problem with this one-to-one relationship, after all, > > a namespace *is* defined by a uri, so... and I don't immediately > > see why this precludes inclusion of elemements from different > > namespaces. > >What if I want to create a schema specifying that (for my set of >documents) an html:p element may contain a tei:foreign element, or a >docbook:Trademark element in addition to the regular HTML elements? Well, if you intend to modify the content spec of an element from a namespace over which you have no control or authority, you might have a problem. Seems to be the same problem that you have if you try to modify a "final" class. That's not to say that the XML Schema work will not offer a way to do so. > >What if I want to create a schema specifying that (for my set of >documents) an html:p element may *not* contain an html:font element? Again, same problem. But neither of these example address the question that was raised by Jonathan. > >It doesn't make sense to have to create a new and different namespace >for either of these -- I'm still using the individual elements in >mostly the same way. I might make sense to be *allowed* to create a new *schema* for both of these examples. The effect of doing so would be to create a new namespace (see SOX). >I could, of course, use some kind of inheritance >scheme, but I don't think the world will buy anything that requires >retrieving 5 or 10 schemas from different servers just to figure out >that an html:a element is from the HTML namespace. I don't think that we know yet what the world will or will not buy (notwithstanding ridicyulous PE ratios). > > > I think the idea is that if a namespace is defined by a uri, it may > > inherit a meaning associated with that uri, for example, suppose > > the uri was a .DTD, would this cause a problem or work any less > > well than a DTD which defines a default namespace and is specified > > in a <!DOCTYPE definition? > >It would cause about the same set of problems as DOCTYPE (perhaps >worse with datatyping and other niceties) -- that's why we need to get >away from it. Of course, David's opinion is his own. Although it may be shared by others in the community, I hope that his opinion will not hold sway over the design and development of better schemas and namespace mechanisms for XML. Regards, Murray xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i... Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; (un)subscribe xml-dev To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; subscribe xml-dev-digest List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)
|
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
|