[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: XHTML and the Three Namespaces
Andrew Layman wrote: > > Regarding David Brownell's statement, "It's my understanding that the > essence of the problem is in the assertion you made there, and throughout > your post: that vocabulary and syntax and namespace are one one thing, > rather than at least two (vocabulary/namespace, and separately syntax as > today captured in DTD)"; I do not in fact make this assertion. What I > said was "There is a vocabulary and syntax called 'Strict'. There is ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > another called 'Transitional'..." I later stated that the solution WG > proposed by the XHTML was to distinguish these by use of namespaces. I can't think I'm alone in reading "a vocabulary and syntax" there as a statement about _one_ thing, rather than at least two. You later wrote about "giving each of the three grammars a namespace" (closing the loop) and said that "elements in each namespace are to be validated against the DTD corresponding to that namespace" to drive it home. > I work to make my wording exact. Please read my mails as though I actually > said what I meant. Many of us work to write exactly what we mean, but I know of nobody that avoids mistakes there. For example, I'm unclear what you think I misread in what you were writing. In what way were you not equating those things? Your points 1-7 come across differently, at least to me. Re point 2, which you identify as "the point of greatest misunderstanding", it is enlightening in juxtaposition with point 3: > 2. Anything so identified can have, at most, one definition. > 3. All distinctions between identified items must be reflected > by a difference in the respective identifiers. Although any page of a dictionary will have multiple definitions for some word, so I'd disagree with #2 on first principles, I think a related issue is perhaps what is meant by a "definition" (as pointed out by Marc McDonald). It's clear to me that #3 is equally wrong: not all distinctions ought to be captured in identifiers. Context is an essential tool. Different usage contexts may have different "definitions" that are fully consistent. The presentational definition of "xhtml:li" is one thing in terms of CSS, another (related) in terms of FOs; and neither is the same as the syntax rules saying where they may appear. The "meaning" (and hence definition) is a function of the task being performed. That again argues against the possibility that there be a "definitive" definition, accessed by retrieval through a namespace URI or encoded in any kind of schema. - Dave 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/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1 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
|