- From: Paul Prescod <paul@prescod.net>
- Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 08:50:38 -0800
- 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