Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: quarantining namespaces
 To be clear, I introduced the term "rot". URIs are not rotten; they are the systemic agreement that makes the web work, the first principle so to speak. I think the rot comes of overloading them and not clearly enunciating principles for how to deal with potential ambiguities that arise from that overloading, that is, not emphasizing the role of interpretants. When Joshua Allen talks about hypertext dispensers, when we talk about namespace handling in XSLT, etc., we are talking about not the languages, but the rules of the processors, the interpretants that take a name and using their local rules for disambiguation and application, interpreting that name. The rest is the politics of recognizing authorities and that is a negotiation. I don't know that namespaces are broken; by dint of secondary specification, an overloaded name from an implementing architecture is introduced into a name system for implemented languages. It works but it means that the implemented language must absorb the semantics of the overloaded name and therefore must be clear about recognizing the prescriptions of that external authority. It is a shared allele. len -----Original Message----- From: jborden@a... [mailto:jborden@a...] Simon, > > Yep. I don't think solutions will be forthcoming, hence the word > "quarantine" in the subject line. Some things are just too broken to > fix. One can certainly look into the archives to find support for whatever viewpoint one chooses, however I submit that XML Namespaces are no more 'broken' than the Web itself. Both are 'broken' and both are useful. Both raise questions and are food for debate. > > > The rot is in the URI. It has to be solved there. > > Yes. > Well, URIs are an essential part of the Web as we know it, and the Web as practiced. You can call them 'rot' but rid yourselves of URIs and you've rid yourself of the Web as we know it today, for better or worse. Now, certainly there is work to be done to clarify how URIs are intended to be used, etc., but like it or not, if you want to deal with the Web (as I do) you need to deal with URIs. All so called issues with XML Namespaces are just issues with URIs in disguise. 
|
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
|
|||||||||
