Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Peter Piatko wrote: > I think it is pretty clear that the syntactic sugar of the Namespace rec > doesn't handle hierarchies all that well, and that Per-Element-Type > partitions introduce such hierarchies (of at least one level anyway). So I > feel that the options are (a) enhance the syntax or (b) simplify (i.e. > flatten) the interpretation of what namespaces are. The current situation > is just confusing. Agreed, although it is mostly confusing because we keep trying to impose things on namespaces that just aren't there. I've many a mini-career trying to debunk these and I still get tripped up... > Option (b) implies that an identifier might map to multiple types. I think > the question boils down whether this ok or not. In the end, I think you have to allow it. My gut tells me that the alternative could get quite nasty. Besides, one of the nice things about XML is that it does let you do your own thing, even if that thing isn't always the best thing to do. -- Ron
|
