• To: "'Ian Graham'" <ian.graham@u...>,<xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: Namespaces best practice: managing dialect evolution --
• From: "Michael Kay" <michael.h.kay@n...>
• Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2001 09:36:58 -0000
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <Pine.SOL.4.21.0111072244270.8391-100000@i...>
• Reply-to: <michael.h.kay@n...>

> So, there are strengths in both approaches -- but the real
> world probably
> lies in between. Has anyone thought through this issue, and
> determined a good strategy to follow?

I've thought about the issue and haven't determined a good strategy to
follow!

But a practical point, having "variant" namespaces (several namespace URI's
whose vocabularies have a high degree of overlap) is very bad news when it
comes to writing XSLT and XPath.

Mike Kay

• References:
  • Namespaces best practice: managing dialect evolution --
    • From: Ian Graham <igraham@i...>

• Prev by Date: RE: DOM or SAX: Sense and Sensibility
• Next by Date: Re: DOM or SAX: Sense and Sensibility
• Previous by thread: Namespaces best practice: managing dialect evolution --
• Next by thread: Re: Namespaces best practice: managing dialect evolution --
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread