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

Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
• From: Joe English <jenglish@f...>
• Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2002 14:07:33 -0700
• In-reply-to: <3D4ADF5D.40E34606@k...>
• References: <3D4ADF5D.40E34606@k...> <3D4AC377.B49E7BB4@k...> <200208021640.g72Ge3rR069573@c...> <200208021922.g72JM9307382@d...>

Kian-Tat Lim wrote:
> I [ktlim] wrote:
> > > Everyone agrees that a namespace is a collection of related
> > > names, whether they be for elements or attributes.
>
> Joe English wrote:
> > I most emphatically do *not* agree with this [*].
> >
> > An XML namespace as defined by "Namespaces in XML" is *not* a
> > collection of related names in any meaningful sense.
>
> Well, then, why is the definition of an XML namespace
> "a collection of names, identified by a URI reference
> [RFC2396], which are used in XML documents as element
> types and attribute names"?

I have no idea why it's defined that way.  That sentence is
at best meaningless, and at worst wrong and misleading.


> Is the objection to the
> word "related"?  What if I define that to mean related
> only in the sense of sharing a URI reference identifier,
> not in the sense of sharing any kind of semantic meaning
> or intended use?

Now *that* makes sense.  Under that interpretation,
'html:head' and 'html:OZZY-R00LS' from my previous
example are indeed related, by virtue of having the
same namespace name.



--Joe English

  jenglish@f...

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>

• References:
  • Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
    • From: Kian-Tat Lim <ktl@k...>
  • Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
    • From: Kian-Tat Lim <ktl@k...>
  • Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
    • From: Mike Brown <mike@s...>
  • Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
    • From: Joe English <jenglish@f...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Markup perspective not code (was RE: Re: URIs, concrete)
• Next by Date: RE: Programming for Markup vs. Markup for Programming
• Previous by thread: Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
• Next by thread: Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread