W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > November 2002

Re: Let's get some principles nailed down

From: Paul Prescod <paul@prescod.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 08:50:38 -0800
Message-ID: <3DD91A5E.2070808@prescod.net>
To: Miles Sabin <miles@milessabin.com>
CC: WWW-Tag <www-tag@w3.org>

Miles Sabin wrote:

> The documentation for a function in a programming language should tell
> you what it does and what it's for. A namespace doesn't _do_ anything
> and it's _for_ disambiguating names ... which is documented perfectly
> adequately in the Namespaces REC

Every particular namespace is "for" something in particular. XHTML is 
for hypertext, MathML for mathematics, SVG for scalable graphics, RDF 
for resource descriptions, etc.

> I _might_ choose to impose additional semantics on my namespaces, in
> which case I agree that I SHOULD document those semantics. But if I
> don't impose additional semantics then there's nothing to be
> documented.

Can you point me to a useful, real-world namespace with no additional 
semantics? If not, then there is nobody who would feel compelled to 
provide documentation when it isn't appropriate. Anyhow, SHOULD means 
should. Nobody will be forced to provide referents.

  Paul Prescod
Received on Monday, 18 November 2002 11:51:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:32:35 UTC