• To: "'Norman Walsh'" <ndw@n...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: Are we ready for the namespace ID registry, yet? (w as: RelaxNG question)
• From: Jeff Lowery <Jeff.Lowery@c...>
• Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 14:06:31 -0700

> The registry idea for namespace prefixes is dead on arrival. 

Just to be clear: I wasn't proposing a registry for namespace prefixes.

> But if namespace scoping is the real source of your pain, that could
> be eliminated (at least in theory; in practice, I think lots of people
> will demand the ability to scope. How else do you slurp up arbitrary
> content and shove it into the middle of your document? Why are
> you...no, ask a silly question...).

You know, I can put up with the occasion slight.  It's being slighted on top
of misinterpretation that gets irritating.

> There's no need for a registry. If namespaces had to be declared on
> the root element, for example, or if they were declared in processing
> instructions that preceded the root element (then you wouldn't even
> need to deal with the hack of psuedo-attributes).

I'll let others argue, if they wish, on the merits of that proposal.

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Are we ready for the namespace ID registry, yet? (was: RelaxNG question)
    • From: Norman Walsh <ndw@n...>
  • Re: Are we ready for the namespace ID registry, yet? (was: RelaxNG question)
    • From: Norman Walsh <ndw@n...>

• Prev by Date: Postel's Law Has No Exceptions
• Next by Date: RE: Postel's Law Has No Exceptions
• Previous by thread: Re: Are we ready for the namespace ID registry, yet? (was: RelaxNG question)
• Next by thread: Re: Are we ready for the namespace ID registry, yet? (was: RelaxNG question)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread