[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Is a namespace a set?
I want to clear up what may be a misunderstanding that I may have promoted. I have described a namespace as being used to define the laws of physics for the particular 'space'. It has been pointed out, Nicholas?, that this is in contradistinction to a namespace being simply a set. 1. A RDDL document defines a proper set of resources each with a name and so a RDDL document can be thought of as defining a traditional namespace. RDDL ::= (id, nature, purpose, href, title, xml:lang, xml:base, content)* the XML ID when associated with a rddl:resource labels the resource with a unique XML name. The other properties of the tuple can be thought of as merely little bits of metadata about the name. On the other hand, this _attributes_ of the resource can be used to locate other or referenced resources which are themselves thus related (but not equated :-) to the namespace. So yes, a namespace is a set, but can be, through indirection, thought of as more. In my example, which I need to clarify, I discuss Euclidian geometry/Newtonian Mechanics and very briefly String Theory. My idea of using this as an example is that while our space _looks_ 3 dimensional to us, as we look deep into an atom, many higher dimensions seem to appear (e.g. String Theory), so that the _analogy_ is simply that while a namespace looks like a simple set, one might look inside and derive a more complex structure. This is simply an analogy that I am making (it is not in the RDDL spec) Jonathan
|
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
|