• From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
• To: XML-DEV <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 14:52:34 +0200

Rick Jelliffe wrote:
> 
> Actually, it is an issue: if namespaces are to be taken from DTD, then
> every different possible combination of modularized HTML has its own
> effective DTD and will therefore need its own namespace.
> 
> So we are not talking about 3 namespaces for XHTML, but potentially
> dozens!

That is not true. If schemas are paramaterizable then we can have one
namespace per schema but still have only a few namespaces. In a
programming language every function has a name, not every possible
combinations of functions:

add( multiply(1,2),multiply(3,4))

not

addmultiplymultiply(1,2,3,4)

 Paul Prescod

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

• References:
  • More than three namespaces for XHTML? (was Re: What XHTML should do with namespaces)
    • From: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@a...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Another look at namespaces
• Next by Date: Re: XML in the real world... Was "Re: Another look at namespaces"
• Previous by thread: More than three namespaces for XHTML? (was Re: What XHTML should do with namespaces)
• Next by thread: Another try on groves
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread