W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-names-issues@w3.org > July to September 1998

Re: PI target names unscoped -- why?

From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 20:23:04 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.32.19980910202156.00acc170@pop.intergate.bc.ca>
To: James Clark <jjc@jclark.com>, David Brownell <db@argon.Eng.Sun.COM>
Cc: xml-names-issues@w3.org
At 04:25 PM 8/16/98 +0700, James Clark wrote:
>David Brownell wrote:
>> The "motivation" (why not clearly defined "goals"?) in the XML
>> namespace draft defines combining "markup from multiple independent
>> sources" as needing namespace collision avoidance mechanisms.  The
...
>I think the use of the word "markup" in section 1 is deeply confusing. 
> I would suggest
>something like:
...
>"We envisage the use of XML documents that draw their element types and
>attributes from multiple vocabularies (collections of element types and
>attributes with defined semantics)

I think James is right and have made changes to this effect.  I have
not, however, done away entirely with the word "markup", nor have I 
introduced the notion of "vocabularies".

 -Tim
Received on Thursday, 10 September 1998 23:22:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:43:30 UTC