RE: Open systems / Freedom ( was RE: The Web as an Application)

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Carlisle [mailto:davidc@nag.co.uk] 
> Sent: September 19, 2013 05:11
> To: Rushforth, Peter
> Cc: David Lee; public-xmlhypermedia@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Open systems / Freedom ( was RE: The Web as an 
> Application)
> 
> On 07/06/2013 14:47, Rushforth, Peter wrote:
> > If a community came up with an extension to the xml namespace that 
> > actually was useful and used
> 
> No. Any suggested extensions should be in "our own" 
> namespaces. That is the model on which namespaces work, you 
> avoid clashes by not trampling in someone else's space.


I guess what I'm saying is that the Web is an important enough application that *even XML* IMHO should make some concessions to it.  "someone else" in this case is the XML Core WG.  Fair enough.  At least those who invented the xml: namespace had the good sense to make it a "must ignore" environment.  It is the one namespace that is not confusing.  My hope with this group would be that at least the advantages and disadvantages could be openly explored without fear of Simon St. Laurent's "border guards".

I'm starting to think that MicroXML may be the future.

Peter

Received on Thursday, 19 September 2013 12:34:17 UTC