Namespace Prefix should be Purely Convienience

[Mark Tucker]

Jim Amsden <jamsden at us.ibm.com>


jm> The semantics should be on the local name and the namespace name
jm> with the prefix being a notional convenience 

I agree.  The prefix should be "purely notational convenience."
Which makes me say: "Give us a way to write element tags with namespaces
but bypassing the prefix." 

So, instead of 

	xmlns:FOO="someUniqueString"
<FOO:DATE>

we could just write
<"someUniqueString":FOO>
....

and be done with the problem of prefix collisions!

I wish Namespaces didn't try to be so helpful!

jm> Note that I'm not implying that tag names are the concatenation of the
jm> namespace name and the local part of the tag name as specified by
jm> WebDAV semantics, only that two elements with the same namespace name
jm> and local name are treated as the same element type.

If you say 
	"two elements with the same namespace name
        and local name are treated as the same element type.",

isn't this saying that, operationally, the "effective ELEMENT tag name"
is the concatenation of the namespace string and the local tag name?




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)