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

Re: Are we ready for the namespace ID registry, yet? (w as: Re

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Are we ready for the namespace ID registry, yet? (w as: RelaxNG question)
• From: james anderson <james.anderson@s...>
• Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 07:24:46 +0200
• In-reply-to: <4827EC373E03DB44AC2AB3900430896B672359@c...>

On Wednesday, Aug 20, 2003, at 00:22 Europe/Berlin, Jeff Lowery wrote:

>> I'm sorry, I clearly misunderstood. What were you proposing a registry
>> for?
>
> Namespace short-string identifier registry.  I did use the word 
> "prefixes",
> but in the sense that these identifiers would be prepended to local 
> names.
> They're not stubs for full namespace IDs, they are the IDs.

what is to prevent a serializer from following the convention that all 
namespace names must be url and all prefixes must be identical with the 
authority component of the respective url. if a required prefix is 
missing it puts a binding in. if that would lead to duplication, that 
is a fatal error. if a prefix binding is present it enforces the 
identity.

there is already a registry for such things, so just following such a 
convention eliminates the "problem".

>
> The reason they're short is so that they can be used for prefixing. 
> Such ID
> prefixes would be mandatory, to eliminate scoping issues. They'd be 
> used for
> both attribute and element names, and namespaces in content.
>
> Perhaps I'm just stubborn or ignorant for thinking that namespace 
> scoping
> issues are the fundamental processing problem for XML.

those issues are fundamental exactly in the sense that entity expansion 
is a fundamental problem. they remain a problem only if one insists on 
processing xml as text rather than insisting on a parser which produces 
an adequate document model.

>  Forcing namespaces in
> root, as you suggest, do simplify scoping considerably.  Still 
> presents a
> problem for brain-dead cut & paste operations, though,

"brain-dead". your characterization.

...

• References:
  • RE: Are we ready for the namespace ID registry, yet? (w as: RelaxNG question)
    • From: Jeff Lowery <Jeff.Lowery@c...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Binary XML == "spawn of the devil" ?
• Next by Date: Re: A standard approach to glueing together reusable XML fragments in prose?
• Previous by thread: RE: Are we ready for the namespace ID registry, yet? (w as: RelaxNG question)
• Next by thread: Re: Are we ready for the namespace ID registry, yet? (was: RelaxNG question)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread