[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Namespace: what's the correct usage?
Hi - I usually just lurk on this list, and often don't have the time to follow even one thread. However, this particular discussion is developing into War and Peace (plus Doctor Zhivago), and this weekend I have had a little extra time to read... Now I have an urge to throw in my two cents' and see if anyone else concurs. My thought is that we are encountering a classic conflict. We would like to develop a data interchange convention which would allow new systems/processors to come online and begin communicating *without* a priori knowledge. We would like to enjoy a data interchange convention which requires a minimum of markup (overhead). We would like to pack as much of the necessary information as possible into one transaction, due to bandwidth, processing time, or what-have-you. That is, if namespace URIs are actually references to pages somewhere...we don't want to be compelled to download those pages before processing our XML data, do we? Our "likes" are in conflict with each other. We know there is no real magic here. We must always have some form of a priori knowledge, even if it is only that we know XML is coming to us as a character stream (ASCII, utf-8, whatever). If we want to ship all necessary knowledge in one transaction, and if we live in the hope that unanticipated recipients will find our transmissions useful, and if we acknowledge that we have little control over the recipients' interpretations, then the best thing we can do is specify everything we possibly can. That is, explicitly name *everything*. Ship the DTD/schema along with the data file...whatever it takes. If our highest priority is to move data out, to impose as little overhead as possible...if we know absolutely that the recipient will treat the content just as we intended...then we can do pretty much what we want. Don't use any namespaces! Settle it all in side agreements, private ICDs, or as we choose. Of course, it's fragile, and it breaks. And it's never a reliable resource for any system(s) other than the ones whose designers have conferred with us. Maybe I am not seeing all the subtleties here. I did come into this conversation partway through. And it is late now, and I am tired. But it does seem to me that there is no "one-size-fits-all" choice, ever. It seems that we each have to exercise judgement in making system tradeoffs. It's good that there are people who care enough about these issues to debate them far into the night, and that there's a place for those people to do so. Aura Sheffield Software Developer ------------------------------------------------------------------ The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org, an initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word "unsubscribe" in the body to: xml-dev-request@l...
|
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
|