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

Re: Was: mode and moved to Namespaces

Subject: Re: Was: mode and moved to Namespaces
From: ac <ac@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 19:30:56 -0400
Re: Was:  mode and moved to Namespaces
Hi Brandon, All,

I am surprised that, with all these XML and XSLT gurus around the table, using more than 8 namespaces in a stylesheet or application, seems like such a strange, "out of bounds", thing. Am I crazy, or missing something big, or is everyone sleeping at the wheel? What are naspaces for? How can this be an issue? I am puzzled.

Don't natural languages at least each have their own "natural" namespace? If an application supports i18n and localization, should it use less namespaces than the number of locale it supports? What about translation dictionaries? Should we reinvent a different mechanism to implement natural namespaces, rather than simply use XML namespaces?

What about the 22 "basic" namespaces that I quoted, as well as other basic XML namespaces? Should one not use RDF when using StratML, or XSD, or Atom?

Should names like "position" be in the same namespace whether it is referring to time, or space, or both? Should one not manage time if one is managing space or vice versa?

What kind of XML data should stylesheets transform, and to what XML data should they transform it to, so that stylesheets do not use more than 8 namespaces?

Why get all the power of XSLT3, functional programming, and higher order functions, for XML, if the subject and object XML is limited to 8 namespaces, including a whole set of predefined ones reserved for the language itself?

Please enlighten me some more, as I am just more puzzled now.


Hi Brandon,

Languages and communications, like all beings and things, are not perfect. The best that we can do is find errors and try better approximations. I thank you for finding these errors and focusing me for a better approximation.



I think Andrew was just clarifying that it was you who said "I have
stylesheets that use in excess of 80 namespaces...", since the way it
was quoted seemed to inadvertently suggest that Andrew said it.  The
following "I don't think I've ever had more than 8 namespaces in a
single stylesheet" was Andrew's own statement, offered in contrast to
the statement for which he appeared to have been credited.

And people complain that reading and understanding other people's code
(XSLT or otherwise) is too hard!  At least there's a
widely-agreed-upon specification for the meaning of that (most of it,
anyway) and limits on the syntax, unlike natural languages. ;)

-Brandon :)

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 12:45 AM, ac<ac@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Andrew, I have not found that quote from the archives and I am curious as to
what was the context and what could my mistake have been, or just how long
ago was that?

On 15 April 2011 09:37, Michael Kay<mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 15/04/2011 09:31, Andrew Welch wrote:
I have stylesheets that use in excess of 80
namepaces, for various purposes.
Ouch. Perhaps I need to start revising my assumption that the number of
in-scope namespaces will always be small enough to make a linear search
Just for the archives it was 'ac' that said that.... I don't think
I've ever had more than 8 namespaces in a single stylesheet.

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.