- From: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
- Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 12:28:02 +0200
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Cc: "WAF WG (public)" <public-appformats@w3.org>
On Aug 08, 2007, at 11:30, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 00:26:36 +0200, Jason Monberg
> <jason.monberg@dshlt.com> wrote:
>> namespaces are important/critical in this context for
>> extensibility. i am
>> assuming that this file will be used to contain elements common to
>> all
>> widgets as well as elements specific to individual widgets.
>
> Why are they critical for extensibility? The format is completely
> separated from everything else in the world
A well designed format is one for which people can make uses and
extensions unforeseen by the creator. Putting a namespace here is
zero-cost, not putting it is just begging to look stupid down the line.
FWIW, Joost's internal widget manifest format uses a namespace, which
makes it easier to implement multiple widget formats too.
> Using namespaces here just complicates things for authors who want
> to copy and paste lines of codes without the level of indirection
> given by namespaces (where they would have to copy the namespace
> decleration too).
Experience shows authors are not that silly, it's just a handful of
specification writers who think that's complicated :)
--
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Will we have donkeys?
- All you can eat!
-- She-Bender & Calculon, Futurama
Received on Monday, 27 August 2007 10:28:15 UTC