[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: WD for Namespaces 1.1

• To: Michael Brennan <Michael_Brennan@A...>
• Subject: Re: WD for Namespaces 1.1
• From: Marcus Carr <mcarr@a...>
• Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2002 11:34:52 +1000
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• Organization: Allette Systems (Australia) Pty Ltd
• References: <D7155AD41ECFD511AF4A00B0D0202CB51DFFFA@m...>

Michael Brennan wrote:

> How many of them use ":" in names? I routinely use XML documents that don't
> use namespaces with standard XML tools that are namespace-aware. Does this
> really require a special mode of processing that does not understand
> namespaces? Will it really break real-world documents out there if any name
> with a ":" must comply with XML namespaces in XML 1.1?

No, I think you misunderstand me - I would never use ":" in a name as the
potential for problems is obvious. I'm happy for ":" to always indicate that a
namespace was being used (or to trick a DTD into validating anyway).

> I'm inclined to think that folding namespace support into the core XML spec
> for 1.1 will have very modest cost.

If an organisation needed to provide v1.1 data, they will likely need to
convert their DTD to a schema, as I doubt if v1.1 processors would support
DTDs. If their editing application doesn't support schemas, they might have to
retool their workforce.

> This seems to me the opportune time to
> do it. If not now, then when? Do some take the position that this should
> never happen?

I'm not saying that I have the answers. I really don't know what the best
approach is and I'm not saying that it shouldn't go ahead, but I think that we
need to make sure that we don't end up breaking exiting systems needlessly.


--
Regards,

Marcus Carr                      email:  mcarr@a...
___________________________________________________________________
Allette Systems (Australia)      www:    http://www.allette.com.au
___________________________________________________________________
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."
       - Einstein

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: WD for Namespaces 1.1
    • From: Jim Ancona <scarhill@y...>

• References:
  • RE: WD for Namespaces 1.1
    • From: Michael Brennan <Michael_Brennan@A...>

• Prev by Date: Re: WD for Namespaces 1.1
• Next by Date: Re: WD for Namespaces 1.1
• Previous by thread: RE: WD for Namespaces 1.1
• Next by thread: Re: WD for Namespaces 1.1
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread