W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org > May 1997

Re: SD5 - Namespaces [fmt]

From: Paul Grosso <paul@arbortext.com>
Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 18:59:51 -0500
Message-Id: <>
To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
I don't have much to say about namespaces yet, except that I pretty
much agree with what Tim says, and I don't think subdoc (at least
as currently defines in 8879) is the answer.  I think what we need
will require something beyond what 8879 offers us now, so I think
it can't be part of XML-lang at this time, and I think we better
start developing something to send to WG8 in time to have it considered
at the groups next (when?) meeting.


At 08:59 1997 05 19 -0700, Tim Bray wrote:
>> From: Jean Paoli <jeanpa@microsoft.com>
>> Consumers of a document may need to verify that it uses a known
>> namespace....
>> Proposal: Every element comes from some schema, which becomes the
>> default schema for that element. The names within the default schema
>> are ...
>The demand for namespace machinery is sudden but, it seems, overwhelming.
>The demand can't be ignored.  Once again, it should go in a separate
>volume in the lang/link/display series.  Once again, it should be done
>in an 8879-compatible way.  Once again, it can't be done properly by
>July 1.
>One detail point.  Using the dot '.' to separate schema & name may 
>have a nice O-O feel but lots of element types already have dots in
>them.  We should change XML-lang to add ':' or some other handy
>character to the name repertoire,  but forbid its use except for
>this purpose.  Then people can use any legal XML name for their
>schematized element types. -T.
Received on Monday, 19 May 1997 20:03:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:26 UTC