Namespace Comments

[Don Park]

I have read the latest namespace spec.  While I am sure that a lot
considerations and discussions have gone into the spec, I am compelled to
ask why something like the following was not chosen?

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<!-- initially, the default namespace is "books" -->
<xml:namespace uri="urn:loc.gov:books">
<xml:namespace prefix="isbn" uri="'urn:ISBN:0-395-36341-6">
    <book>
    <title>Cheaper by the Dozen</title>
    <isbn:number>1568491379</isbn:number>
    <notes>
      <!-- drop the default into HTML for some commentary -->
      <xml:namespace uri='urn:w3-org-ns:HTML'>
      <p>
          This is a <i>funny</i> book!
      </p>
      </xml:namespace>
    </notes>
    </book>
</xml:namespace>
</xml:namespace>

If attribute-based namespace declaration is the only way to go, why not use
a simple word like 'namespace' instead of 'xmlns' so that its purpose is
clear to the reader?

If 'namespace' is too common, people can qualify it with 'xml' like this
'xml:namespace'?  Why not consider changing the name of the standard to
something shorter?

Saving of 4 characters does seem quite worth the use of obscure word like
'xmlns' for something as common as namespace.

Best wishes,

Don Park
CTO/Docuverse



xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)