W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > November 2004

RE: [RESPONSE qt-2004Feb0384-01] [General] Please use less namespaces

From: Michael Rys <mrys@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 12:15:43 -0800
Message-ID: <BAE415CEAA831548800F68C44E905AF5FE07DE@RED-MSG-60.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Per Bothner" <per@bothner.com>
Cc: <public-qt-comments@w3.org>

I happen to think that schema should not necessarily add these types by
changing their name. But then that is a schema WG coordination issue....

Best regards

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Per Bothner [mailto:per@bothner.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 12:00 PM
> To: Michael Rys
> Cc: public-qt-comments@w3.org
> Subject: Re: [RESPONSE qt-2004Feb0384-01] [General] Please use less
> namespaces
> Michael Rys wrote:
> > Sharing the namespace will lead to confusion. For example, I can
> > to xs:anySimpleType inside a schema but I cannot refer to
> > xs:anyAtomicType. Keeping them in separate namespaces makes it clear
> > that they are treated differently in different contexts.
> There is confusion either way.  Currently, people have to remember and
> understand which types as in xs and which in xdt.
> Also, what happens when/if dayTimeDuration get added to XML Schema.
> Will we have both xdt:dayTimeDuration and xs:dayTimeDuration?  Given
> XQuery's "name-based" type-system, would there be a problem with two
> types with the same name?
> --
> 	--Per Bothner
> per@bothner.com   http://per.bothner.com/
Received on Tuesday, 30 November 2004 20:16:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:57:02 UTC