[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Registered Namespace prefixes
Jeff Lowery wrote: > Uhhh, no. You can't mandate intent through syntax. Preaching to the choir. I argue that constantly, often to little effect. My point, though, was that the ostensible reason for which we are exploring a namespacing scheme is our hope of disambiguating names so that processors may handle instance names and the content associate with them in a sensible and appropriate way. > No semantics, no semantics, no semantics. If I say semantic and registry in > the same sentence, flame me but good. Starting now. :-) Great. But, again, what we are trying to do is enable processors to do something sensible with names, and the associated content, which they encounter in XML instances. The choice of what to do is the effective assignment of semantics to--or better the elaboration of semantics from--the particular syntax which we use to differentiate the instances. Try as you might you cannot take the semantics--in the form of the differing processing which different syntactic labels will signal--out of any such registry. Simply understood, such a registry is a shorthand for the semantics which will be elaborated from processing to be chosen on the basis of the syntax registered. It is precisely for that reason that I am arguing against a registry, or at least against a non-local one. On the other hand, essential knowledge for any local processor to do its own job is the history of what has worked for it in the past, indexed by the instances to which any such processing was applied, to compare against the instances which that processor will encounter in the future. Respectfully, Walter Perry
|
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
|