W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html-editor@w3.org > January to March 1999

Re: XHTML -- Namespaces

From: David Brownell <db@Eng.Sun.COM>
Date: Mon, 1 Mar 1999 10:58:20 -0800
Message-ID: <095901be6415$7a383f70$6500000a@xenon.brownell.org>
To: <www-html-editor@w3.org>
Cc: <murray.altheim@Eng.Sun.COM>

-----Original Message-----
From: David Brownell <db@eng.sun.com>
To: www-html-editor@w3.org <www-html-editor@w3.org>
Cc: murray.altheim@eng <murray.altheim@eng>
Date: Monday, 1 March, 1999 9:49 AM
Subject: XHTML -- Namespaces



>On the other hand, the precedent being set by this use of XML
>namespaces is to make each potential combination of element
>vocabularies -- rather than each vocabulary, e.g. XHTML, SMIL, CBL,
>and so on -- have a different namespace.  Such a factorial explosion
>is very bad to design into a base architecture.  When ten different
>vocabularies can be combined, almost four million namespace
>URIs would need to be defined!

Minor correction -- the explosion is huge, and not strictly factorial.

1 vocabulary --> 1 URI
2 vocabularies --> 3 URIs (both, plus either one alone)
3 vocabularies --> 7 URIs (all, 3 pairs omitting each one, 3 singletons)
... etc

Were it factorial, that'd be 1, 2, 6 ...   I'm
too lazy this AM to work out the exact formula, but the point
remains that this notion of defining a namespace URI for each
overlapping set of XML vocabularies is nonscalable!!

- Dave
Received on Monday, 1 March 1999 14:02:36 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:16:44 GMT