- From: Digitome Ltd. <sean@digitome.com>
- Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 08:45:23 +0100
- To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
The namespace issues are very close to those addressed in various ways by various programming languages. Syntax issues aside and very much thinking out loud the following spring to mind (with apologies to Python and Modula 2 at the very least):- 1) == <!-- XML Doc "Bar.xml" imports element type declarations A,B,C from an external DTD "foo" The element type declarations are then part of the base DTD's namespace --> <? from DTD foo import A,B,C> <A>I am an A from the DTD foo 2) == <!-- XML Doc "Baz.xml" imports all element type declarations from an external DTD "foo". The element type declarations do not become part of the base DTD's namespace but are available via name space qualification --> <? import DTD foo> <A>I am not A in the foo DTD <foo::A>I am an A from the DTD foo 3) <!-- XML dtd foo.dtd Makes certain element type declarations "public" --> <!element A...> <? exports A,B,C> This sort of thing could help sort out the name space issues but does not help in sub-classing element types. For that we will need soom OO stuff in the Prolog at least. I cannot dream up any way to do it without new syntax for element type declarations though. <warning type = "outrageous leap into the unknown"> I wonder if having access to grove like properties of element type declarations would be a useful thing for subclassing DTDs? <? from foo import a> <!element VariationOnA (a::ContentModel | b | c)> The only way this sort of thing can be done today is via voodoo paramater entities. </warning> Sean Sean Mc Grath sean@digitome.com Digitome Electronic Publishing http://www.digitome.com
Received on Thursday, 22 May 1997 04:09:46 UTC