[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Namespace: what's the correct usage?
8c0@greyarea><990296865.1337.0.camel@l...><00e601c0e0b4$7ec 21e80$0500a8c0@greyarea><990298368.1339.1.camel@l...><00ff0 1c0e0f4$c3dbd520$0500a8c0@greyarea><990351207.1339.2.camel@l... main> <000801c0e13b$4c89c030$0500a8c0@greyarea> <990356714.1339.4.camel@l...> <002401c0e141$2a041b90$0500a8c0@greyarea> Content-Type: text/plain X-Mailer: Evolution/0.10 (Preview Release) Date: 20 May 2001 12:34:38 +0000 Message-Id: <990362078.1339.9.camel@l...> Mime-Version: 1.0 On 20 May 2001 16:25:52 +0100, Martin Gudgin wrote: > > But hey, maybe that's what some people want. > > And maybe not. I don't want to cause confusion or lead people down an > ultimately futile path. I'm looking for reasons why and why not to use a > particular approach. You've brought yet another set of namespace issues to the surface, just when I think we were hoping that things had settled down. I think the primary reason for not using the particular approach you propose is that it is not explicitly blessed by the Namespaces in XML specification, which purports to explain such mappings, but that doesn't appear to be enough to satisfy you. The use of the approach you describe in SOAP means that the XML community is going to have to take yet another look at how namespaces do and don't work. XML Schema already extended namespace functionality by using QNames in attribute values, and SOAP appears to have gone yet further. In my mind, that's embrace, extend, and break, but in any event we probably should be aware that this is happening.
|
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
|