Re: Default namespaces

Uche Ogbuji scripsit:

> There really isn't any such thing as a default namespace for
> MicroXML. In XML proper as well as in MicroXML it so happens that you do
> not have to explicitly declare the XML prefix, but that's a separate matter
> altogether from a default namespace.

+1

> If you are suggesting that MicroXML should support other prefixes that need
> not be declared in any way, I think I can say with some confidence that
> there's no chance of that at all ;)

Yes and no.  In the Clark draft there are no prefixes at all except "xml:".
You can put elements in arbitrary namespaces by using the "xmlns" attribute,
but you cannot express namespaced attributes.

In the Cowan draft, prefixes are allowed on attribute names but not element
names: there is no requirement to declare them, though the consequences
are on your head if you don't.

> You can express RDF and OWL in the Clark and Cowan drafts of MicroXML just
> fine. Just declare all your prefixes on the root element, which is what you
> should be doing in full XML, anyway, if you're using it sanely*.
> 
> * Of course I refer to both the Joe English definition of "sanity" and the
> layman's language definition as well

I don't think the Clark draft allows OWL or RDF because of the limitations
on attribute names.

-- 
Being understandable rather than obscurantist poses certain
risks, in that one's opinions are clear and therefore     | John Cowan
falsifiable in the light of new data, but it has the      | cowan@ccil.org
advantage of encouraging feedback from others.  --James A. Matisoff

Received on Saturday, 28 July 2012 19:31:14 UTC