- From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
- Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2002 11:23:47 -0800
- To: www-tag@w3.org
At 12:29 AM 04/02/02 -0500, Paul Prescod wrote: >I wasn't really talking about how this maps into the MIME system at all. >I was just pointing out that we are going down the wrong path if we try >to associate machine readable specifications with namespaces and then >apply them to parts of the document tree dynamically. Namespaces (as >defined today) do not represent useful "languages" or "document types" >as Tim and Tim implied. Namespace don't necessarily represent languages - the URIs normally associated with the prefixes "xml:" and "xlink:" are examples. But namespaces can be used as labels to identify languages: examples are XHTML and SVG, and there are more every day. This is the interesting case that we're arguing about. When we've got a language that declares a namespace as part of its definition, a namespace on the root element is a plausible signaling mechanism. The argument we're having is, what's the relationship between that and media types? -Tim
Received on Monday, 4 February 2002 14:25:22 UTC