Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: How to design XML to have broad utility and yet alsoenable
 On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 4:23 PM, David Lee <dlee@calldei.com> wrote:
but in the end ... is it really harder than in java having to do Yes. In the end I dont find namespaces a big deal. In $EMPLOYER's schema development group, to which I belong, we use namespaces extensively, hundreds of them, in the schemas we publish to internal (mostly) and external (a few) customers. We also have one namespace that we use ourselves, for adding annotations to the schemas we develop. It's basically a simple rich-text schema with some additional elements like <element-name> and <attribute-name>.
Well, I did an analysis a while back of all the schemas we had published so far. It turned out that the namespace URI for this private namespace existed in 12 different incompatible variants. If we, the schema creators, can't get it right, what hope is there for anyone else?
Writing good software takes work, there is no holy grail of "No Code Needed" or "No Brain Needed". No, but there's such a thing as gratuitous difficulty. GMail doesn't have rotating .sigs, but you can see mine at http://www.ccil.org/~cowan/signatures 
[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
|
|||||||||
