- From: mca <mca@amundsen.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 08:38:14 -0400
- To: David Lee <David.Lee@marklogic.com>
- Cc: "Rushforth, Peter" <Peter.Rushforth@nrcan-rncan.gc.ca>, David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>, "public-xmlhypermedia@w3.org" <public-xmlhypermedia@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAPW_8m6Jmt=xo2QSGHwDyz+yhzDA_OKqvYGvDVyH-GGTPCnJew@mail.gmail.com>
"...100 year old scotch..." /me perks up<g>. mca +1.859.757.1449 http://amundsen.com/blog/ http://twitter.com@mamund http://mamund.com/foaf.rdf#me On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 8:35 AM, David Lee <David.Lee@marklogic.com> wrote: > > > > As to "why the xml namespace" aspect, I think it is important to hand > > developers the tools for the > > job. Namespaces are not part of XML, and indeed not everyone wants to > use > > them, and I think the > > goal of XML is to be successful on the internet, namespaces or not. > > To do that, I believe a language needs to have elements which reflect the > > environment of deployment. > > I suggest pragmatically taking this goal of the table for the simple fact > that it is not going to happen. > W3C "owns" the "xml:" prefix. (and namespace). They have made it > perfectly clear the scope of things they are willing to add, > and that scope is prety much zero right now. > This is not a fight we will win, regardless of merit. I bet you a 100 > year old scotch on that. > > So I suggest, again pragmatically, that if this effort has *any* chance of > adoption that it be implemented either with no namespace attributes or with > a distinct non-xml: namespace or both . > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > David Lee > Lead Engineer > MarkLogic Corporation > dlee@marklogic.com > Phone: +1 650-287-2531 > Cell: +1 812-630-7622 > www.marklogic.com > > This e-mail and any accompanying attachments are confidential. The > information is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is > addressed. Any review, disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of this > e-mail communication by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the > intended recipient, please notify us immediately by returning this message > to the sender and delete all copies. Thank you for your cooperation. > > > > >
Received on Thursday, 26 July 2012 12:39:11 UTC