- From: Peter Murray-Rust <Peter@ursus.demon.co.uk>
- Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1997 23:07:41 GMT
- To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
In message <199702111554.PAA20960@curia.ucc.ie> [... Jon Bosak...] writes: > > >We should get rid of the hyphen in front of XML in reserved names and > > >attributes. > > > > > >"-XML" is ugly, it's hard to type, it looks dumb, and it doesn't > > >really pollute the name space any less than any other reserved string. > > >Reserve "XML" and be done with it. Does this mean (as I infer and hope) that all XML-* (elements starting with 'XML-') are reserved? If so, it should presumably be stated in the XML spec. Otherwise the spec will need to list the (?5) reserved element types. Would it be a reportable error to have other tags starting with 'XML-'? The reason I mention this is that it seems that a managed XML- namespace may be extremely useful. I'm NOT making a proposal, but suggest the following scenario. We shall shortly create the primordial tag-soup where anything goes, but it is possible that order may evolve out of chaos. As an example, I expect lots of authors to create a <DATE> tag. Its semantics could be formalised (perhaps by using the ISO standard) and XML/W3C might play a role in this. Perhaps it could evolve through <XML-X-DATE> (by analogy with unregistered MIME types) to <XML-DATE>. When discussing how we add semantics to elements, one approach (where appropriate) is to develop a set of such information components. These could be used in WF documents without the need for a DTD, or alternatively could be bolted into individual DTDs without needing to supply explicit semantics. At this stage the question would be whether any/all 'XML-' strings other than those in XML-LINK were reserved, and perhaps whether an XML-X- mechanism was allowed. P. -- Peter Murray-Rust, (domestic net connection) Virtual School of Molecular Sciences, Nottingham University, UK http://www.ccc.nottingham.ac.uk/~pazpmr/
Received on Wednesday, 12 February 1997 10:10:15 UTC