Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
From: "Ronald Bourret" <rpbourret@r...> > I think the real culprit here isn't whether local element type names are > qualified or not. It's that local element types exist at all. In the XML Yes, it perhaps was a failure in architecture. In the vacuum at W3C (which hopefully now the TAG group will rectify, unless the horse has already bolted) there should have been clear policy made that local element names need not be supported. Certainly I think developers should steer clear of local names: even if they are using a path-aware schema language such as Schematron which can cope with all kinds of contextual variation, the name of an element should describe its genus in some clear namespace. Otherwise we need PSVI (i.e. explicit context-based typing) or path-based processing (implicit context-based typing). Cheers Rick Jelliffe
|
