[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

• To: <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the
• From: Norman Gray <norman@a...>
• Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2002 11:07:30 +0100 (BST)
• In-reply-to: <200208011752.NAA25837@m...>

Greetings,

On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, John Cowan wrote:

> Norman Gray scripsit:
>
> > If some of the elements and attributes in an instance are in a certain
> > namespace, then I can look at that instance with namespace-shaped
> > spectacles and `see' only the things in that namespace.
>
> Only in the sense that you can look at, say, attribute names with "r"-shaped
> goggles and ignore all the ones that don't begin with "r".  Namespaces
> are just a convention for extending the allowed names of element types and
> attributes without changing the XML 1.0 WF rules.

Well yes, obviously, but that's not the point.

The point is that namespaces imply a generic transformation which
removes everything but the elements and attributes in a particular
namespace.  The resulting document can then be processed in a generic
way (I don't need to point out to you that this is an AF-style view).

That is, namespaces are _simple_, and the problems consist in how you
specify this generic transformation -- that is, what is and isn't in
the namespace -- and the current spec complicates this by introducing
the default namespace, then ducks the problems this causes by the
evasion in section 5.2.

Also, there's no role here for the `global attribute' nonsense.

All the best,

Norman


-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Norman Gray                        http://www.astro.gla.ac.uk/users/norman/
Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, UK     norman@a...

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the
    • From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@c...>
  • Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>

• References:
  • Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Markup perspective not code (wasRE: Re: URIs, concrete)
• Next by Date: Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask thequestion)
• Previous by thread: Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the
• Next by thread: Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread