W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > April 2008

Re: Namespaces and XML/XHTML (was Re: State and Status of WAI-ARIA approach to host-language embedding)

From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 23:04:48 +0300
Cc: www-tag@w3.org
Message-Id: <BBD7FCDB-DEAD-414B-9675-3EBB3FF2D912@iki.fi>
To: Henry S.Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>

On Apr 18, 2008, at 11:17, Henry S. Thompson wrote:

> Henri Sivonen writes:
>
>>> Exactly -- having aria-role and aria:role as aliases is bad design.
>> Having only aria-foo and not having aria:foo solves the problem.
>
> That proposal is not, as far as I know, on the table -- I would  
> certainly argue against it as fundamentally breaking XML design  
> principles.

Actually, it is what is being implemented.

> As you can see from the minutes of yesterday's call, I'm struggling to
> understand what appears to be a strong antipathy towards namespaces
> for any purpose in some quarters:
>
> "HT: This constinuency that can't abide namespaces... why is it that
>      they can't?
>
> "DC: I don't know; I don't share their opinion, but I know they're
>      out there."
>
> Can you explain this?

The aria-foo vs. aria:foo issue is not about antipathy towards  
namespaces. It is a pragmatic choice in the face of legacy constraints  
(both spec and software).

Let's not allow namespace issues for other purposes get in the way of  
ARIA.

-- 
Henri Sivonen
hsivonen@iki.fi
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Saturday, 19 April 2008 20:05:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:56 GMT