Background material, belated

I suspect that a large part of the past months' debate has been because
people are, intentionally or not, attempting to revisit the basic question
of what namespaces are supposed to do for us. If there's anyone who hasn't
read the introductory articles on Namespaces, I recommend you do so. These
are a good clear statements of what problems (some members of?) the
Namespaces Working Group thought they were solving... and of which problems
they chose _not_ to address.

To find these, go to http://www.w3.org/XML/#9901names and follow the
"(also: articles by WG members Clark, Bray, and one by Bourret)" links.

Unfortunately Tim never had time to write the Annotated XML Spec he
promised at the end of his article. But Bourret's "Namespace Myths
Exploded" article has some very useful clarifications... including one I
was just trying to remember where I'd seen (#4).

______________________________________
Joe Kesselman  / IBM Research

Received on Monday, 26 June 2000 14:59:20 UTC