Re: Names beginning with "xml"

On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 10:59 AM, David Lee <David.Lee@marklogic.com> wrote:

>
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 10:30 AM, David Lee <David.Lee@marklogic.com>
> wrote:****
>
> if attributes xml:* is allowed but reserved.
> What is the data model for the QName of say  xml:abc    (ignore for now
> "abc" is not yet defined ... I want to avoid pulling in the other specs).
>
> Localname = "abc" ?
> Localname = "xml:abc" ?****
>
> ** **
>
> The latter, though I should mention that none of the 4 options, A, B, C or
> A-prime, would have the concept of a local name. It's just a name, so:****
>
> ** **
>
> name := "xml:abc"****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> To get close to achieving the new goal of some reasonable attempt at a
> data model compatibility, we need to define the relationship between uXML
> Names and XML(+NS) QNames
>

-1

****
>
> The simpliest in my mind is to ban colons and make  uXML Name == XML+NS
> QName.Localname
>

No. The simplest is not to touch qnames or local names with a barge pole.



> ****
>
> Why is it so important to complicate the spec to allow xml:  in attributes
> if we assign no semantics to it ?
>

Well we also allow "foo" elements and attributes but assign no semantics to
them. Assigning semantics is for another layer.

As for complication, it's maximum one extra production.   That's a tiny
price to pay to leave the door open for other XML Core vocab layers.


-- 
Uche Ogbuji                       http://uche.ogbuji.net
Founding Partner, Zepheira        http://zepheira.com
http://wearekin.org
http://www.thenervousbreakdown.com/author/uogbuji/
http://copia.ogbuji.net
http://www.linkedin.com/in/ucheogbuji
http://twitter.com/uogbuji