W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > April to June 2001

RE: Part 2: Datatypes

From: Jeff Lowery <jlowery@scenicsoft.com>
Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2001 13:41:58 -0700
Message-ID: <3549BAFD79A7D411A1CF00508B62B5BC766B03@exchange-us.scenicsoft.com>
To: "'ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk '" <ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>, Jeff Lowery <jlowery@scenicsoft.com>
Cc: "''www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org' '" <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>
>> Sorry, I'm sure this has been asked several times already:
>> Committee-endorsed XML Schema namespace prefix convention: xs:? xsd:?
>> other? none?

> No WG opinion, as far as I know.  I quite like the fact that the
> primer and the structures spec. use _different_ prefixes -- it
> emphasises that the prefix is not in fact the issue.

> ht

I agree and disagree. True, the prefix is not the issue, but namespace
identifiers themselves tend to be rather long. Subtle differences between
identifiers can be easily missed by human readers, leading to confusion and
errors. At some point a convention will be established for XML Schema
namespace prefix: why not have it come from the WG? That way, everyone
starts off on the same page. 

Received on Sunday, 8 April 2001 16:43:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:49:56 UTC