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