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

Re: Venetian Blinds vs Garden of Eden patterns for industrysta

• From: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>
• To: Pete Cordell <petexmldev@codalogic.com>
• Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 15:27:17 +0100

On 28/10/2010 11:16, Pete Cordell wrote:
>
> The approach mirrors JSON's response to "there's nothing like XML
> namespaces in JSON."
>


Not really, I think not using namespaces at all is a reaonable approach 
as is defining all related elements to be in the same namespace, but the 
elementFormDefault feature of XSD is one of its more bizarre quirks, 
especially as it defaults to the form that, as you have observed, is 
very rarely used.

> I think the issue is that the interpretation of a element depends on the
> context provided by the parent and XSLT and other XPath technologies
> have difficulty with that.

XPath has no difficulty referencing an element in no namespace that is 
the child of an element in a namespace, just ns1:foo/x but if you need 
the namespace to uniquely identifu x then it's more natural to put it in 
the relevant namespace, and if you don't need a namespace because the 
use is clear from the context then why put the parent element in a 
namespace?

David


________________________________________________________________________
The Numerical Algorithms Group Ltd is a company registered in England
and Wales with company number 1249803. The registered office is:
Wilkinson House, Jordan Hill Road, Oxford OX2 8DR, United Kingdom.

This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star. The service is
powered by MessageLabs. 
________________________________________________________________________

• References:
  • Re: Venetian Blinds vs Garden of Eden patterns for industry standards XML Schemas
    • From: "Pete Cordell" <petexmldev@codalogic.com>