W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > October 2009

Re: ISSUE-41/ACTION-97 decentralized-extensibility

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2009 06:55:54 -0700
Cc: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Adrian Bateman <adrianba@microsoft.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, Tony Ross <tross@microsoft.com>, Brendan Eich <brendan@mozilla.org>
Message-id: <90A7F003-5490-4CCA-8FC1-1B5495C3A028@apple.com>
To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>

On Oct 3, 2009, at 6:27 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:

> Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>> On Oct 3, 2009, at 5:28 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
>>> Statements that I feel people can all agree to:
>>> 1) People (as in users and customers) have, do, and will continue  
>>> to use "xmlns:" syntax in HTML, and have, do, and will continue to  
>>> build tools that solve their perceived use cases based on this  
>>> syntax.
>> What's our goal for what we're calling  "Decentralized  
>> extensibility"? Is it to provide *any* form of extensibility that  
>> doesn't require centralized coordination? Or is it to provide a  
>> syntax that uses prefixes, colons as a separator, indirect prefix  
>> binding, URIs as namespace identifiers, and xmlns attributes to  
>> declare prefixes?
>> I get the sense that, for many people, only a solution that looks  
>> like Namespaces in XML will satisfy.
>> If that is indeed the case, should we rename this issue from  
>> "Decentralized extensibility" to "XML-style namespace syntax"?
> At the present time, I don't care what the issue is called, but I  
> don't see consensus on what the values of localName, prefix,  
> namespaceURI (and possibly tagUrn) should return, and that's what I  
> would like to see resolved.

Do you think we can come to consensus on those questions without  
having consensus on the bigger picture (i.e. should XML-like  
namespaces be supported at all?) I would guess nearly everyone's  
answers to those questions will be determined by their opinions about  
XML-like namespaces.

Received on Saturday, 3 October 2009 13:56:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:52 UTC