- From: Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>
- Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2003 16:38:03 -0400
- To: www-tag@w3.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 To backup the proposed principle that designers SHOULD use namespaces, I suggest: The Web is significantly a <emph>networked</emph> information system. Authors and applications can use URIs uniformly to identify different resources on the Web. After representations of these resources have been retrieved, they may be processed in a variety of ways. Some applications (and some users) will undoubtably build new resources by combining several representations together. This is particularly easy, and potentially useful, when XML representations are available for all the resources. However, combining representations in this way moves them out of their original context and places them in a new context. This change of context introduces the possibility of information loss. Any information that depended on the local context will no longer be available. What is needed is a mechanism for establishing a global context for the elements and attributes in the XML resources. This problem bears a strong resemblance to the distinction between relative and absolute URI. While the many hundreds of relative URI references to "index.html" on a typical web server may be entirely unambiguous in their respective contexts, they have no unambiguous global meaning. But each such relative URI has an unambiguous absolute URI that can be established in its local context and used when a document is moved. This solves the problem for URI references. For elements and attributes, their names can be seen as analogous to relative URI. Within their original context, they have meanings that are clear and entirely unambiguous. Namespaces in XML provides a mechanism for establishing a globally unique name that can be understood in any context. The "absolute" form of an XML element or attribute name is the combination of its namespace URI and its local name. This is represented lexically in documents by associating namespace names with (optional) prefixes and combining prefixes and local names with a colon as described in [Namespaces in XML]. Designers that use namespaces are thus providing a global context for documents authored with their schema. Establishing this global context allows their documents (and portions of their documents) to be reused and combined in novel ways not yet imagined. Failure to provide a namespace makes such reuse more difficult, perhaps impractical in some cases. The most significant technical drawback to using namespaces is that they do not play well with DTDs. DTDs perform validation based on the lexical form of the name, making prefixes semantically significant in ways that are not desirable. As other schema language technologies become widely deployed, this drawback will diminish in significance. Be seeing you, norm - -- Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM | "Bother", said Pooh, as he deleted his root XML Standards Architect | directory. Web Tech. and Standards | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.7 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/> iD8DBQE+2mQrOyltUcwYWjsRAkJgAJ9jDopddvn9CI2IQhgaJ7lzHddp6wCgotwJ 9/0u/bYyg//TNKlMcrApEtQ= =81DF -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Sunday, 1 June 2003 16:38:11 UTC