[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: QNames in attribute values
Ronald Bourret wrote: > Note that there is actually a choice here about how to associate URIs > and prefixes. Most specs use namespaces declarations. XML-DBMS uses > elements at the start of the document to declare namespaces. This > simplifies processing and reduces confusion This is an important distinction. By providing an application-level namespace declaration mechanism, you avoid the need to carry around a lot of unnecessary information about in-scope namespaces. I'm glad to see another real-world precedent for application-level namespace declarations, because I too think that QNames in values are eminently useful and that they can be used without relying on xmlns declarations. > but also reduces > portability, since you can't move map fragments around using something > like the DOM and be guaranteed of correct results. I'm not sure that it would be very reliably portable. Any processing model that doesn't consider [in-scope namespaces] to be of significance (because it assumes that XML namespaces are for putting element and attribute names in a namespace, how novel) will throw away the prefixes and everything will break. <snip/> > And no, there is no going back. QNames in attribute values are too > massively useful and easy to use. Let me rephrase the question: Is it too late to require QNames in values to be resolved with an application-level namespace declaration? Evan
|
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
|