Another look at namespaces

Marc.McDonald at Marc.McDonald at
Sat Sep 18 03:33:19 BST 1999

> : 	RE: Another look at namespaces
> At 05:58 PM 9/17/99 -0700, Marc.McDonald at wrote:
> >
> >> At 03:24 PM 9/17/99 -0700, Marc.McDonald at wrote:
> >> 
> >> >. In particular, why should XHTML
> >> >go off and decide a mechanism  to solve a problem which is a general
> >> >problem and is being worked on by the schema group?
> >> 
> >> We didn't decide someone else's problem. We took a work in progress and
> >> used it as the basis of *one* aspect (out of several) for our decision
> on
> >> the namespace issue. 
> >> 
> >> Ann 
> >> 
> >> But that is jumping the gun - part of a work in progress  is in a
> proposed
> >> recommendation. 
> The key phrase in there is "one aspect"  -- and we're still not *using*
> schemas, we're addressing the possibility that this may happen, as well as
> dealing with the other use cases described in Steven's message. 
> Ann
	"... we're addressing the possiblity that this may happen ..." 
	I just don't see why a proposed recommendation should address a
possibility in an area that hasn't even had a working draft released. Just
don't address it until it is a recommendation and save us all this time.

	Which Steven and which message? There have been so many messages and
I didn't see it in the Sept archive.

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at
Archived as: and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at

More information about the Xml-dev mailing list