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

RE: What is the rule for parsing XML in a namespace inside HTM

• To: "Bullard, Claude L \(Len\)" <len.bullard@i...>
• Subject: RE: What is the rule for parsing XML in a namespace inside HTML?
• From: "Joshua Allen" <joshuaa@m...>
• Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 12:53:40 -0700
• Cc: <xml-dev@l...>
• Thread-index: AcRtnFDFk6ChWTpJRaW8H8kwg3UH2AALTq5Q
• Thread-topic: What is the rule for parsing XML in a namespace inside HTML?

I can speculate about why it was designed that way, but it's still icky
IMO.  Two things:

1) I would prefer the "stat" to be declared like a regular XMLNS
2) A PI with a name like ?Mapping is a bit grandiose.  Like nobody else
would ever want that name?  It should be scoped IMO. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) [mailto:len.bullard@i...] 
> Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 7:26 AM
> To: Joshua Allen
> Cc: xml-dev@l...
> Subject: RE:  What is the rule for parsing XML in a 
> namespace inside HTML?
> 
> All good.  How about this:
> 
> <?Mapping XmlNamespace="stat" ClrNamespace="WiseOwl.Statistics"
>                               
> Assembly="WiseOwl.Statistics.Library" ?> <Window 
> xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/2003/xaml" Visible="true">
>     <SimpleText Foreground="DarkRed" FontSize="14">Hello 
> World!</SimpleText>
>     <stat:PoissonDeviate Mean="5.0" />
> </Window>
> 
> I would still expect a namespace declaration for the stat namespace. 
> I've no objection to the mapping PI given that it has to tie 
> together three pieces of information.  I realize that the 
> colon isn't doing that much, but again, expectations are set. 
>  Care to comment on the implications of the above with 
> respect to interoperability (yes, the example is a user 
> extension, so interoperability is dicey at best).
> 
> len
> 
> 
> 
> From: Joshua Allen [mailto:joshuaa@m...]
> 
> ... going with whatever works best for
> the user and can get consensus among browser vendors, rather 
> than doing user-hostile things in the name of purity to some 
> random irrelevant spec.  In fact, the Hyatt discussion has 
> morphed in a sense into a discussion about namespaces in HTML 
> [1], and the remarkable thing is that *none* of these people 
> are suggesting the facist route of "force the whole world to 
> use XHTML and only then will it work!".  That's a good sign, IMO.
> 

• Follow-Ups:
  • oracle received patent on content management
    • From: Robert Koberg <rob@k...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Edi complexity, does ebxml really reduce it?
• Next by Date: RE: What is the rule for parsing XML in a namespace inside HTML?
• Previous by thread: RE: What is the rule for parsing XML in a namespace inside HTML?
• Next by thread: oracle received patent on content management
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread