atom feed90 messages in org.xml.lists.xml-dev[xml-dev] My proposal: Implicit names...
FromSent OnAttachments
Micah DubinkoJul 31, 2009 4:06 pm 
COUTHURES AlainAug 1, 2009 3:35 am 
Amelia A LewisAug 1, 2009 7:43 am 
Kurt CagleAug 2, 2009 11:54 am 
Kurt CagleAug 2, 2009 12:30 pm 
Amelia A LewisAug 2, 2009 6:44 pm 
rjel...@allette.com.auAug 2, 2009 9:06 pm 
Micah DubinkoAug 2, 2009 9:21 pm 
Micah DubinkoAug 2, 2009 9:39 pm 
Dave PawsonAug 2, 2009 11:20 pm 
Michael LudwigAug 3, 2009 8:30 am 
Kurt CagleAug 3, 2009 10:41 am 
Pete CordellAug 3, 2009 11:56 am 
Michael KayAug 3, 2009 1:46 pm 
Kurt CagleAug 3, 2009 4:42 pm 
rjel...@allette.com.auAug 3, 2009 8:39 pm 
Pete CordellAug 4, 2009 12:36 am 
Tim BrayAug 4, 2009 9:44 am 
Micah DubinkoAug 4, 2009 11:17 am 
Micah DubinkoAug 4, 2009 10:54 pm 
Liam QuinAug 4, 2009 11:28 pm 
Dave PawsonAug 5, 2009 12:45 am 
Pete CordellAug 5, 2009 3:17 am 
Tim BrayAug 5, 2009 12:53 pm 
Liam QuinAug 5, 2009 1:46 pm 
Michael KayAug 5, 2009 4:44 pm 
'Liam Quin'Aug 5, 2009 4:50 pm 
Pete CordellAug 6, 2009 12:23 am 
Pete CordellAug 6, 2009 12:35 am 
rjel...@allette.com.auAug 6, 2009 12:57 am 
Michael LudwigAug 6, 2009 1:37 am 
Kurt CagleAug 6, 2009 1:47 am 
rjel...@allette.com.auAug 6, 2009 1:50 am 
Michael KayAug 6, 2009 2:10 am 
Michael KayAug 6, 2009 2:21 am 
Michael KayAug 6, 2009 2:25 am 
Pete CordellAug 6, 2009 2:38 am 
Pete CordellAug 6, 2009 2:45 am 
rjel...@allette.com.auAug 6, 2009 3:08 am 
Pete CordellAug 6, 2009 3:30 am 
Michael KayAug 6, 2009 3:33 am 
Simon St.LaurentAug 6, 2009 5:57 am 
Dave PawsonAug 6, 2009 7:16 am 
Michael KayAug 6, 2009 7:32 am 
rjel...@allette.com.auAug 6, 2009 7:41 am 
Richard SalzAug 6, 2009 7:46 am 
Liam QuinAug 6, 2009 8:03 am 
Liam QuinAug 6, 2009 8:10 am 
Michael LudwigAug 6, 2009 8:10 am 
Pete CordellAug 6, 2009 9:37 am 
Dave PawsonAug 6, 2009 9:47 am 
Liam QuinAug 6, 2009 9:51 am 
Dave PawsonAug 6, 2009 9:53 am 
Dave PawsonAug 6, 2009 9:54 am 
Liam QuinAug 6, 2009 10:17 am 
Kurt CagleAug 6, 2009 10:19 am 
Richard SalzAug 6, 2009 10:25 am 
Michael LudwigAug 6, 2009 10:32 am 
Kurt CagleAug 6, 2009 10:38 am 
Richard SalzAug 6, 2009 10:41 am 
Pete CordellAug 6, 2009 10:42 am 
Dave PawsonAug 6, 2009 10:47 am 
Liam QuinAug 6, 2009 11:05 am 
Pete CordellAug 6, 2009 11:49 am 
John L. ClarkAug 6, 2009 12:32 pm 
Simon St.LaurentAug 6, 2009 1:06 pm 
Michael LudwigAug 6, 2009 1:13 pm 
Michael LudwigAug 6, 2009 1:16 pm 
Michael LudwigAug 6, 2009 1:39 pm 
Liam QuinAug 6, 2009 2:43 pm 
Michael LudwigAug 6, 2009 3:11 pm 
Michael KayAug 6, 2009 3:32 pm 
rjel...@allette.com.auAug 6, 2009 8:21 pm 
rjel...@allette.com.auAug 6, 2009 8:32 pm 
Michael KayAug 7, 2009 1:10 am 
michael odling-smeeAug 7, 2009 1:28 am 
Michael KayAug 7, 2009 1:33 am 
michael odling-smeeAug 7, 2009 2:24 am 
Michael LudwigAug 7, 2009 3:00 am 
Dave PawsonAug 7, 2009 8:50 am 
Liam QuinAug 7, 2009 9:08 am 
Micah DubinkoAug 7, 2009 5:03 pm 
Micah DubinkoAug 7, 2009 5:05 pm 
Robert KobergAug 7, 2009 5:08 pm 
Dave PawsonAug 12, 2009 12:34 am 
Dave PawsonAug 13, 2009 12:35 am 
Henri SivonenAug 13, 2009 11:47 am 
Micah DubinkoAug 23, 2009 3:05 pm 
David CarverAug 23, 2009 4:21 pm 
Henri SivonenAug 24, 2009 4:03 am 
Subject:[xml-dev] My proposal: Implicit namespaces
From:rjel...@allette.com.au (rjel@allette.com.au)
Date:Aug 6, 2009 12:57:56 am
List:org.xml.lists.xml-dev

Here is my suggestion for namespaces and HTML.

Because 1) the purpose of namespaces is disambiguation, but when we start with HTML we rarely find that elements with the same local name are used, and certainly not in the exactly the same context, and 2) the namespace URI is used as a symbol to connect to schemas etc, but when we use HTML we find that browsers operate by built-in knowledge that does not require extra resolution of the URI,

we can simplify our lives by saying "namespaces in HTML are only ever needed for non-standard customized fragments."

In other words, if you want to put in SVG into an HTML document, there are not name clashes (in context) so there is no purpose served by namespaces. All the HTML committee needs to do is say something like

"These are the standard vocabularies: HTML, SVG, RDF, etc etc, if you find an element belonging to them, that starts a new branch."

In formal terms, you could see it as having a notional name-rewriting step (which could be specified in ISO DSRL by the way) that goes from bare names to qualified names.

The advantages: * HTML keeps plain and simple, and no-one has to worry about namespace markup * people who want to add custom bits can do so, and can use namespaces and so on using the current mechanism. * XHTML can continue on without change * mixed convention documents need not be distrupted * no big effort for defining a new syntax, which may be an exercise in shifting verbosity from one location to another, would be required

(Another way of achieving much the same thing would be to allow multiple namespaces as the default, with a schema-linked mechanism where the namespace URI can be chosed by matching the local name in context with unambiguous choices in a list of schemas. Not less defaulting, but smarter!)

Cheers Rick Jelliffe

_______________________________________________________________________

XML-DEV is a publicly archived, unmoderated list hosted by OASIS to support XML implementation and development. To minimize spam in the archives, you must subscribe before posting.

[Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/ Or unsubscribe: xml-@lists.xml.org subscribe: xml-@lists.xml.org List archive: http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php