Eh?? The XML community cannot pretend to be or speak for the HTML community. There is no push to change namespaces except for HTML by the HTML WG.

So we can expect the XML community to block any changes unless the changes offer some *significant* benefit. The support of the HTML WG is necessary, if not sufficient.

I think the key issue is non-distruptiveness. The XML side won't accept something that is too disruptive on balance; and the HTML side is to some extent saying that Namespaces have proved too disruptive for HTML to swallow.

(My own opinion is that this is all a side-effect of the W3C's intense desire to avoid anything like a long-term plan or a co-ordinated strategy. For example, what if 2000 the HTML group had decided that by 2010 HTML parsers should accept full XML, including qualified names? We would be in the position now where the syntax could catch up with the APIs and objects, rather than being constrained in them. Instead, we only get short-term considerations that is out-of-step with the long-term technological cycle.)

Cheers Rick

_______________________________________________________________________

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