Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Tim Bray wrote: > > Wow. For a second I thought "what a brilliant idea, why didn't anyone > think of it before". And maybe it is. Hm... is it a problem that you > can have an element type and an attribute name in the same namespace, > but they're really different names? > > E.g. <b:foo b:foo="32" /> > > the two b:foo's are really different things. -Tim Not necessarily. The just name different things. This is a misconception which reappears often in the discussion of namespaces. Perhaps, a misconception which made the situation more complex that it need be. The problem is that, on numerous occasions the "namespace" is conflated with a "binding space". That is, the identity of a name is distinct from the contexts in which it is bound. That is, a function in a parser which maps (String uri, String localPart) -> QName is distinct from those functions, elsewhere in an xml processor, which map (Document d, Qname tagname) -> ElementDeclaration, (Element e, Qname tagname) -> Element, (Element e, Qname attname) -> Attribute, or whatever. While one can conceive of a storage model in which the distinction between tagname and attname is maintained on a global basis, it is difficult to conceive of the advantages over a model in which the identity of the tag/attname is qualified by the presence of the binding context. That is, the names are the same, the contexts are different. ...
|
