W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-forms@w3.org > July 2007

Re: serialization=""

From: Erik Bruchez <ebruchez@orbeon.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 19:46:45 +0200
Message-ID: <46A8DE05.1090804@orbeon.com>
To: "Forms WG (new)" <public-forms@w3.org>

Good point.

But I should point out that there have been lots of complaints that XML 
namespaces are confusing ;-)

-Erik

Nick_Van_den_Bleeken@inventivegroup.com wrote:
> and when using namespaces xmlns=""
> 
> Nick Van den Bleeken  -  Research & Development
> Inventive Designers
> Phone: +32 - 3 - 8210170
> Fax: +32 - 3 - 8210171
> Email: Nick_Van_den_Bleeken@inventivegroup.com
> 
> 
> 
> "Klotz, Leigh" <Leigh.Klotz@xerox.com> 
> Sent by: public-forms-request@w3.org
> 07/25/2007 11:08 PM
> 
> To
> <ebruchez@orbeon.com>, "Forms WG (new)" <public-forms@w3.org>
> cc
> 
> Subject
> RE: serialization=""
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just FYI we also use a "" in includenamespaceprefixes.
> Leigh. 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-forms-request@w3.org [mailto:public-forms-request@w3.org]
> On Behalf Of Erik Bruchez
> Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2007 1:48 PM
> To: Forms WG (new)
> Subject: serialization=""
> 
> 
> All,
> 
> We thought about this at Orbeon and we think that using a blank value 
> for the attribute remains awkward. It is pretty much unseen in XML-based
> 
> languages out there, and it could also indicate that the developer has 
> forgotten to put a value for the attribute.
> 
> "none" is not a media type, but neither is a blank string. So I am going
> 
> to be a flip-flopper here and get back to the idea that "none" is 
> preferable to an empty attribute.
> 
> -Erik
> 


-- 
Orbeon Forms - Web Forms for the Enterprise Done the Right Way
http://www.orbeon.com/
Received on Thursday, 26 July 2007 17:47:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 October 2013 22:06:44 UTC