• To: Bill de hÓra <bill@d...>
• Subject: RE: namespaces (was RE: rss regularis(z)ation)
• From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...>
• Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2003 17:43:27 -0700
• Cc: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>,<xml-dev@l...>
• Thread-index: AcNQqoC6vxkaUsNPQ86XPaZVrKAmlAACFYUA
• Thread-topic: namespaces (was RE: rss regularis(z)ation)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill de hÓra [mailto:bill@d...] 
> Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2003 4:39 PM
> To: Dare Obasanjo
> Cc: Simon St.Laurent; xml-dev@l...
> Subject: Re:  namespaces (was RE:  rss 
> regularis(z)ation)
>
> > Debating the pros and cons of XML namespaces is like 
> arguing about whether the internal combustion engine is a 
> good idea. The world has moved on.
> 
> In your world maybe, and good luck to ya. In my world XML 
> Namespaces are being discarded as a bad idea.

Obviously we live in different worlds. Mine is described here 

	 http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/dnxml/html/understxml.asp

What does yours look like? 

-- 
PITHY WORDS OF WISDOM 
Any given program, when running, is obsolete.                                                     

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. 

 

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: namespaces (was RE: rss regularis(z)ation)
    • From: Bill de hÓra <bill.dehora@p...>
  • Re: namespaces (was RE: rss regularis(z)ation)
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>

• Prev by Date: RE: the web client interface was RE: Two linkquestions
• Next by Date: Re: rss regularis(z)ation
• Previous by thread: RE: namespaces (was RE: rss regularis(z)ation)
• Next by thread: Re: namespaces (was RE: rss regularis(z)ation)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread