W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xmlhypermedia@w3.org > July 2012

RE: Hypermedia - Why

From: David Lee <David.Lee@marklogic.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 05:43:46 -0700
To: "Rushforth, Peter" <Peter.Rushforth@NRCan-RNCan.gc.ca>, David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>
CC: "public-xmlhypermedia@w3.org" <public-xmlhypermedia@w3.org>
Message-ID: <EB42045A1F00224E93B82E949EC6675E16AFF17A61@EXCHG-BE.marklogic.com>
Call me back when you get an answer.

Until then, we can proceed without worrying what namespace (if any) this work ends up  in.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rushforth, Peter [mailto:Peter.Rushforth@NRCan-RNCan.gc.ca]
> Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2012 8:39 AM
> To: David Lee; David Carlisle
> Cc: public-xmlhypermedia@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Hypermedia - Why
> 
> To the spokespeople of the w3c: Why not the xml: namespace ?  You defined
> the
> architecture of the web, did you not?  Are the two incompatible in some way?
> 
> Not willing to take it off the table until we hear "why" :-).
> 
> Peter
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: David Lee [mailto:David.Lee@marklogic.com]
> > Sent: July 26, 2012 08:36
> > To: Rushforth, Peter; David Carlisle
> > Cc: public-xmlhypermedia@w3.org
> > Subject: RE: Hypermedia - Why
> >
> >
> >
> > > 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 12:44:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:42:06 UTC