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

Re: More namespaces fun!

• To: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: More namespaces fun!
• From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
• Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2002 12:24:52 -0700
• References: <C4ABF16B-D26F-11D6-8E90-0003938E7308@t...> <3DA11698.90508@p...> <3DA1DA26.7020604@t...>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826

Tim Bray wrote:
>...
> 
> Paul, you're about the fifth smart person to fall into this trip which 
> means it's a nasty one and RDDLers have to be careful.  There's no such 
> thing as a RDDL for a document.  There's a RDDL for a *namespace*.

Actually I'm not convinced that the RDDL specification is technically 
limited that way**, but I understand that namespace explanation is the 
central point of RDDL. Let me rephrase my point:

  * if I encounter a document "out of the blue" with only one namespace, 
I would confidently look up the RDDL and use the schemas, stylesheets, 
classes, etc. specified there.

  * if I encounter a document o-o-t-b with only one namespace 
represented on the root element, but others inline, I would proceed to 
the RDDL with about 80% certainty (not sure what to do in code about 
this confusion, but...). I would have NO IDEA what to do about the 
schemas, etc. for the inner namespaces.

  * if I encounter a document o-o-t-b with a namespace on the root and 
another namespace on an attribute then my certainty about the 
applicability of the RDDL has to drop to about 60% because of the XSLT 
precedent.

I find this personally an uncomfortable situation but I think that RDDL 
only exposes it, not causes it.

  Paul Prescod

** on thinking about it, I kind of wonder whether documents should be 
able to suggest RDDLs as they can suggest schemas and stylesheets.

• References:
  • Re: More namespaces fun!
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
  • Re: More namespaces fun!
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>

• Prev by Date: Re: More namespaces fun!
• Next by Date: Re: More namespaces fun!
• Previous by thread: Re: More namespaces fun!
• Next by thread: Re: More namespaces fun!
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread