Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
At 05:19 PM 24/08/01 -0700, Evan Lenz wrote: >if what you mean by >"element types are global" is that there is always a one-to-one >correspondence between an element name and a content model. Ron, is this what you mean? Has anyone ever argued that there should be a 1-to-1 linkage between name and content model (or any other set of semantics)? >#2 was never true for me in the first place. In fact, I would consider the >use of namespaces to be orthogonal to the use of local element types. Yes! Anyone disagree? >Yes, and so it should, and so they should. In my world, types and names are >not necessarily the same thing. I agree. Unfortunately, XML 1.0 uses "type" to mean "name", essentially. I think Evan has hit the bull's-eye here. Are we making progress? -Tim
|
