[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Registered Namespace prefixes
This idea just keeps getting worse. You're basically asking for a centralized version of RDDL, the benefits of which are dubious at best but the negatiove ramifications could be significant. ________________________________ From: Chiusano Joseph [mailto:chiusano_joseph@b...] Sent: Wed 2/26/2003 4:27 PM To: Jeff Lowery Cc: XML Dev; regrep@l... Subject: Re: Registered Namespace prefixes [Cross-posting from XML-DEV to the OASIS/ebXML Registry TC] Jeff, Regarding the following: <Quote> My opinion is that the answer lies in a prefix registry. I know that's controversial, mainly because it creates an authority structure that has to be consulted prior to assigning prefixes to names. I think this can be mitigate, though, by having a provisional namespace prefix mechanism that is essentially the same as it exists now, minus default namespaces. Registered prefixes would then be denoted by special naming conventions. </Quote> I think you are *very very* close to something, but not quite there. What I mean is this: namespace prefixes in XML schemas/documents are the proverbial "syntactic sugar" - that is, they are really "local" to the XML schema/document in which they are declared. However, what really matters is the actual namespace identifier that the prefix represents (that is the "something" that you were close to). I believe it would be very beneficial for one to be able to use a "namespace registry", so that they could accurately reference namespace identifiers and "include" them (using term loosely) in XML schemas/documents with whatever prefix they choose. This opens up all sorts of possibilities in an XML registry, such as: (1)Query on all "XML artifacts" (elements/attributes/datatypes" that are in a given namespace; (2)Reassign XML artifacts from one namespace to another (would automatically search all registered XML schemas/documents for all declarations/use of such artifacts in such namespace and change the namespace identifier in the XML schema/document); (3)Perform an automatic comparison of the "contents" of 2 (or more) namespaces, for harmonization purposes (perhaps an organization has a "test" namespace and an equivalent "production" namespace, and they wish to determine which artifacts need to be promoted from test to production at the proper time); ...and countless more. Thanks so much for bringing this idea up. Kind Regards, Joe Chiusano Booz | Allen | Hamilton Member, OASIS/ebXML Registry TC Jeff Lowery wrote: > > Wait a sec while I change into my Nomex suit... > > I'd like to propose a mechanism for minimizing namespace hassles while > maintaining readability. I expect this will raise hackles immediately, but > hear me out: > > The mechanism for declaring namespace prefixes seems to be the primary > failure point for namespaces. The association by scope of a prefix and it's > declaration gives rise to all sorts of mischief when scope changes during > document manipulation. Add default namespace declarations and things get way > too interesting sometimes. > > All-in-all, given the design motivations of the WG, the basic mechanism is > sound on a syntax level. Unfortunately, it creates dependencies withing a > document that then need to be managed both internally and externally. Is > there a way to manage these dependencies better, make them more > idiot-proof? > > My opinion is that the answer lies in a prefix registry. I know that's > controversial, mainly because it creates an authority structure that has to > be consulted prior to assigning prefixes to names. I think this can be > mitigate, though, by having a provisional namespace prefix mechanism that is > essentially the same as it exists now, minus default namespaces. Registered > prefixes would then be denoted by special naming conventions. > > The advantage of a registry is that prefixed names become universal names > when prefixes are registered. There are no scope issues. The primary > disadvantage of registration is that there will be a prefix rush. I don't > see a dependency on access to the registry at parse time, unless there are > resources to be associated with the prefix (such as a URI to a RDDL doc) > that the parser needs. > > And, lastly, default namespace declarations would have to go... > > I'm sure this is not a new proposal, but it's been at least a year since it > was shot down last time... :-} Those permathreads need regular wear or > they grow stiff. > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an > initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> > > The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ > > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription > manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
|
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
|