W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-uri@w3.org > May 2000

Re: looking for packaging, not a schema

From: Simon St.Laurent <simonstl@simonstl.com>
Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 09:55:49 -0400
Message-Id: <200005181353.JAA31116@hesketh.net>
To: keshlam@us.ibm.com, xml-uri@w3.org
At 09:47 AM 5/18/00 -0400, keshlam@us.ibm.com wrote:
>Our first goal _must_ be to make Namespaces work. That's the question on
>the table.

I wish it were that simple - it seems that multiple agendas involving
namespace usage are on the table simultaneously, that those agendas are
throughly intertwined.

>Nobody has yet proposed a way to reliably process an absolutized relative
>name that will support the Namespace spec's primary goal: unambiguous
>recognition of which elements and attributes belong to a particular

It's not clear that such a creature exists, though I'd be happy to find
one.  The permutations I've done all seem to result in potential
interoperability issues.

Simon St.Laurent
XML Elements of Style / XML: A Primer, 2nd Ed.
Building XML Applications
Inside XML DTDs: Scientific and Technical
Cookies / Sharing Bandwidth
Received on Thursday, 18 May 2000 09:53:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:13:58 UTC