- From: Andrew Layman <andrewl@microsoft.com>
- Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 11:29:02 -0700
- To: "'Arjun Ray'" <aray@q2.net>, w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
Arjun Ray writes: "FWIW, I would prefer a way to indicate namespaces via attribute trickery, because down the road I can see somebody discovering the need to accomodate name-sharing across name-spaces and thus a way to specify more than one name-space as "simultaneously active". The CONCUR syntax allows this, as does Eliot's suggestion to use architectures (if I've understood that correctly), but a construction like 'name-space:gi' doesn't." I think that what I had in mind is orthagonal to CONCUR. As I understand it, CONCUR asserts that an element is not only of one type, but is actually of several types which it then proceeds to list by naming the several types. Each name comes from some namespace. Presently these names are not qualified to their namespaces; if we used qualification they could be. Similarly, I think, unless I am missing something, that namespaces are very different from architectures. Architectures give us a form of inheritance. However, even if the element's meaning is expressed in terms of inheritance, each element's name is still relative to some namespace. Knowing which space is a necessary first step in understanding the element. --Andrew Layman AndrewL@microsoft.com
Received on Friday, 23 May 1997 14:29:05 UTC