- From: Jon Bosak <Jon.Bosak@Eng.Sun.COM>
- Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 23:06:00 -0700
- To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
In order to better understand the requirements for namespaces, several members of the SGML ERB met in phone conference with key participants in the PICS-NG effort last Friday. We didn't get through all the issues in the time available, but we did arrive at some important preliminary understandings. There seemed to be general agreement on the following: 1. One workable way to universally disambiguate the names of elements is to associate them somehow with specific URIs. Not everyone agrees that this is the best way -- some of us would prefer a mechanism like the SGML formal public identifier -- but there seems to be a general acknowledgement that it will work. 2. While some namespaces may be specified in a machine-interpretable form, other namespaces (and perhaps a certain component of all namespaces) will be in a form that cannot be interpreted by a machine. 3. There seemed to be general agreement that validatable structural information is not among the things that minimally need to be conveyed by a namespace identifier. For example, it might be necessary to convey the information that an <author> element is intended to contain the name of a human or organization that created a work, and it might be necessary to convey the fact that its data type is STRING, but it is not necessary in meeting the PICS-NG requirements that the <author> element specify either an inherited content model from some DTD or that it conform to a content model from some DTD. In other words, as far as we can tell at the moment, the namespace problem does not require a solution that involves DTDs. This does not mean that such a solution would not be useful, but it does seem to imply that it can wait for the SGML revision. 4. As indicated in the example just given, it is necessary to be able to get more than one category of "meaning" about a given element. These different semantic axes may have to come from different places. For example, in <birthday>19850527</birthday> it may be necessary to point to one specification in order to indicate that the content refers to someone's date of birth and to a different specification to indicate that content happens in this case to be in ISO format. This is multiple inheritance, but of a kind that can apparently be dealt with simply by providing the ability to attach multiple namespace identifiers to a given element. 5. There is hope that the additions to xml-lang needed in the short term can be reasonably small, just enough to enable the solution of the more general problem later on. Jon
Received on Tuesday, 10 June 1997 03:21:26 UTC