[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: To namespace or not to Namespace ....
FWIW, I actually like that you always know where an XML construct is coming from. That way, you are sure that paragraph is paragraph is paragraph no matter what type of document you are editing. Or at least that it is Common's paragraph and not anybody else's. And with XML namespaces, there's no reason you couldn't change the prefixes to something shorter, e.g., t1:, c:, l:, etc. -Nora Dowling -----Original Message----- From: David [mailto:dlee@calldei.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2010 1:43 PM To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org Subject: Re: To namespace or not to Namespace .... Good point Liam, the "hating you" part I forgot. Your right. If the XML has to look like <type1:section> <common:paragraph>Paragraph <linking:alink/> text </common:paragraph> </type1:section> Instead of <section> <paragraph>Paragraph <alink/> text </paragraph> </section> They (and I) *will* hate me. Ug. Can this be done by an inclusion at the XSD level ? So I can atleast get code reuse ? If not even "documentation reuse" would be useful, that is "document" the fact that various tags are "shared" across schemas even if its not semantically enforced. ------------------------- David A. Lee dlee@calldei.com http://www.calldei.com http://www.xmlsh.org On 4/7/2010 1:33 PM, Liam R E Quin wrote: > On Wed, 2010-04-07 at 13:15 -0400, David wrote: > >> [...] >> > >> For example all the schemas have a concept of >> linking, a concept of paragraphs etc ... while the majority of the >> structure is domain specific, it would be nice to share the common parts. >> Which all roads leads to .... >> >> Namespaces !!!! >> > In the SGML world it generally led to a shared element pool, as Eve > Maler liked (likes?) to call it. > > Once you make authors deal with > <spec1:section> > <common:title>..</common:title> > <spec2:topic> > <common:purpose> > <common:paragraph> > <spec2:step> > <spec9:part-number>... > they will hate you and make you wear shoes for the rest of your life. > > But you are right, it's technically possible. In many programming > languages, namespaces would let you say, > > import common; > import section from spec1; > import topic, step from spec2; > import part-number from spec9; > > and then use unqualified names. That sort of functionality can be a > great help, but it is not what XML namespaces do today. > > Liam > > _______________________________________________________________________ XML-DEV is a publicly archived, unmoderated list hosted by OASIS to support XML implementation and development. To minimize spam in the archives, you must subscribe before posting. [Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/ Or unsubscribe: xml-dev-unsubscribe@lists.xml.org subscribe: xml-dev-subscribe@lists.xml.org List archive: http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
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
|