[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Programming for Markup vs. Markup for Programming
Hi Len, Len Said: Yes, I realize that people want namespaces in core. It's a bad idea and if these threads don't get that across clearly, people aren't listening. There is a lot of basic work that can be done that never touches namespaces. Didier replies: I can say from a practical perspective that namespaces are useful since one particular feature of XML is precisely to enable the creation of a new domain language by assembling other domain languages. I do not have this advantage with other languages and this is probably the biggest invention of XML. However, the inherent problem with assembling disparate domain languages is that they may use the same word for a different meaning. An other advantage but not actually in the spec is the capability to relate the namespace to some documentation, a document identified by the namespace URI giving more information about this vocabulary/structure/semantics construct set. I cannot easily send a C++ or a smalltalk spec and related document with a C++ or smalltalk program but I can link a namespace to an on-line documentation. If the whole community including W3 would simply, for a moment, stop the Byzantine fights and think in "practical" terms of what can _really_ help the XML framework users whatever them call themselves programmers or XML authors, we would progress in the right direction. (1) even if I could include such links in the headers - but C++ or smalltalk are not web-based languages
|
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
|