Re: Namespaces and ixml

> I proposed a way of doing namespaces using the existing mechanisms:
>
> data: @xmlns:iso, iso:date+.
> @xmlns:iso: ^"http://example.com/ns/date".
> iso:date: ...etc...
>
> My feeling is that even if there were another notation added as well for
> namespaces, the method above would have to work anyway.
> So why would we want to have two methods of doing the same thing?

Just a note to reiterate what Norm and Steven have already said: the method above absolutely must NOT work anyway as an XML output.    The relevant wording of the spec is "Grammars must be written so that any serialization of a parse tree produced from the grammar is well-formed XML."

Thanks,
Tom

_________________
Tomos Hillman
eXpertML Ltd
+44 7793 242058
On 2 May 2022, 23:32 +0100, Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>, wrote:
> ixml is about taking implicitly structured (textual) data, recognising that
> implicit structure, and making it explicit in some way or another on
> output.
>
> XML is one of the targets for that explicit output, and currently the best
> for representing the abstractions. It need not be the only one, even though
> I recognise that some of you are involved only because of the XML aspect.
>
> input -> ixml -> output
>
> The real ixml is that middle bit.
>
> However, ixml is not XML, nor, contrary to what you may think, does it
> contain any XML-specific items:
> ^ represents structured data, and was initially chosen because it looks
> like a tree, and has the added benefit of looking like an XML bracket on
> its side.
> @ represents data that is made unstructured on output (you could say it
> is destructured). I had several candidates for the mark, such as =, which
> looks flattened and un-tree-like, but in the end I chose @ as the symbol
> used in XML for flat data.
>
> Namespaces are not a concept anywhere within ixml, nor do they map to any
> concept within ixml. It is purely a feature of XML, and one that was not
> even originally in the design of ixml ("not for generating any particular
> version of XML"). Adding explicit notation for namespaces somewhat fouls
> the ixml nest, making it specifically about a particular output format.
>
>
> The call tomorrow is immediately before me giving the talk of my life to an
> audience of 4000 people, so I'm hoping it won't become too quarrelsome.
>
> Speak to you tomorrow.
>
> Best wishes from New Orleans,
>
> Steven
>