Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Seairth Jacobs wrote: > I think I was not being clear. The use of "primary" and "secondary" were in > terms of the roles played in a given document. "Primary" indicated the > vocabulary associated to the doctype (e.g. whichever vocabulary the root > element belonged to). "Secondary" indicated all other vocabularies that > were not the primary vocabulary. As a result, a given vocabulary could be > in a primary role in one case and in a secondary role in another case. If primary and secondary are roles a vocabulary plays determined by whether it's the root element, then you're talking about vocabularies being sometimes being in a namespace, and sometimes not, depending on whether the the root element in the vocabulary is the root element in a document. That's arguably worse than a rule saying primary vocabs are fixed to the root and can't be embedded. Essentially you're mandating element names in a vocabulary must change if the vocabulary is the root element in a document. I've seen people do things like that, it's problematic at best. Bill de hÓra
|
