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

Re: Long Namespaces

Subject: Re: Long Namespaces
From: "Karl Stubsjoen" <kstubs@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2007 16:24:02 -0700
Re:  Long Namespaces
As usual, the input has been fantastic; thanks.
I have found that in my XSL development namespace use has become
invaluable.  Especially when the templates become nested through
import and includes.
In my case, there is a natural hierarchy which exists and the
prefix/namespace tells the story.  For example a variable which has
been defined in the base template, the prefix should be xslb, be for
base.  I than have site level templates, application level templates,
and page level templates, the prefixes (in same order) would be:
xsls, xsla, xslp.  So in your "page" template, top level template, if
you were referencing the following variable:  xsls:status, you'd know
to seek the base level template for its declaration.
This has become common practice for me.
The complaint is that these short names are confusing, which I argue
is not the case because of the availability and localization of the
namespace declaration.  Never the less, I've changed, the prefixes are
now like this:
xslSite, xslApplication, xslPage.


On 6/7/07, Michael Kay <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
There's some kind of law about natural language that says short words are
used more often than long words. Language has evolved that way because it
improves communication. When you have a concept that is very frequently
referenced, it's best to use a short name for it, because this reduces the
time taken by the reader to recognize it. So for a namespace like xsl or xs
which is used hundreds of times in a stylesheet, a short prefix works well.
It's likely that the saxon namespace will be used less often, so a slightly
longer name is appropriate.

I think a short prefix also helps the reader to focus their attention on the
local part of the name, which is the part that carries more information.

There's a school of thought, of course, which tries to ban short names like
"i" and "j" from programming entirely. This is of course a stupid
over-reaction to programs that over-use such names. The fact of the matter
is that bad programmers will produce unreadable code whatever disciplines
you impose on them.

Michael Kay

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Karl Stubsjoen [mailto:kstubs@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: 07 June 2007 18:58
> To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject:  Long Namespaces
> Is there any creed that suggests that namespace decelerations
> are either bad or shunned upon?  It seems that 3 letter
> namespaces are the norm.  Is anyone using verbose namespace
> declarations regularly?
> Karl..

Current Thread


Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!

Buy Stylus Studio Now

Download The World's Best XML IDE!

Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!

Don't miss another message! Subscribe to this list today.
First Name
Last Name
Subscribe in XML format
RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3
Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member
Stylus Studio® and DataDirect XQuery ™are products from DataDirect Technologies, is a registered trademark of Progress Software Corporation, in the U.S. and other countries. © 2004-2013 All Rights Reserved.