W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlschema-dev@w3.org > August 2004

Re: qualified local/global Re: Namespace problem

From: Christopher Milton <cmiltonperl@yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 05:50:43 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <20040820125043.23042.qmail@web20826.mail.yahoo.com>
To: xmlschema-dev@w3.org

Suppose you had a system for tracking valuable signed and numbered
editions of a book.

Details of the book might be from namespace Book.
Details of the shop might be from namespace Retail.
The VAT paid data might be from namespace Taxes.
And you could bundles these bits into a schema of
namespace Merchandise or of SpecialCollection.

Makes perfect sense to me, reusing elements from
different namespaces.


--- Volker Zink <Volker.Zink@porabo.ch> wrote:
> What i does not understand is why there is the need of defining one 
> element of a complex type to be in namespace A and another element or 
> attribute in namespace B. As i use namespaces in my programming 
> environment it makes no sense to put part of an object in a different 
> namespace as another. So i think a complex type as a whole (all local 
> elements and attributes) should be in one namespace too (it may be 
> important to get the types from differnt namespaces, but thats a 
> different thing). Can someone explain me why the expressive power to put 
> parts of a complex type in a different namespace as the complex type 
> itself is needed?
> 
> [For me XML-schema is a way to define lightweight objects. I am a 
> programmer, so this should be nothing astonishing :-) So i wonder why 
> certain apects of objects are much easier in my programming environment 
> than the corresponding aspect in XML schema, or are missing in XML 
> schema (why is there no namespace hierarchy?).]
> 
> Volker
> 
> 
> Michael Kay schrieb:
> 
> >>My confusion is all due to my belief that namespace prefixes 
> >>would never 
> >>play a role in attribute *values*, which is obviously wrong 
> >>for XSDs. I, 
> >>for one, would appreciate an XSD syntax that makes these things more 
> >>straightforward (=does not use xmlns attributes).
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >
> >I have suggested before, and suggest again, that any specification that
> >allows the use of namespace prefixes in attribute content (for example XML
> >Schema and XSLT/XPath) should provide an alternative syntax that uses the
> >namespace URI in place of the prefix, thus at least giving users the option
> >of creating documents that have no hidden dependencies on namespace
> >prefixes.
> >
> >Michael Kay
> >
> >
> >
> >  
> >
> 
> > begin:vcard
> fn:Volker Zink
> n:Zink;Volker
> org:PORaBo Consulting
> adr;quoted-printable:Lohstampfestrasse 11;;High-Tech-Center
> 1;T=C3=A4gerwilen;;8274;Schweiz
> email;internet:Volker.Zink@porabo.ch
> tel;work:+41 (71) 666 7652
> x-mozilla-html:FALSE
> url:http://www.porabo.ch/
> version:2.1
> end:vcard
> 
> 
Received on Friday, 20 August 2004 12:50:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:15:10 UTC