Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
<Quote> that aren't so abstract to be illegible? </Quote> At the risk of going in a circle here: Isn't this the job of the namespace prefix/identifier at the top of an XML schema/XML document? Namespace prefixes are merely syntactic sugar, and are not even passed to the Infoset. Do they really deserve that heavy an emphasis? Kind Regards, Joe Chiusano Booz | Allen | Hamilton Jeff Lowery wrote: > > > > > As with your response. ;) > > > > Care to elaborate? (question was regarding the use of hierarchical > > URN/URLs). > > I was hoping that would be elaboration enough. <g> > > Okay, to be more explicit, would you really want to type (or read) something > like: > > urn:us:gov:dod:don:navy: > > in front of each and every element and attribute name in a hypothetical Navy > XML document? I wouldn't, although I do the equivalent in Java often enough. > > I think the pertinent question is: are there enough short string sequences > for all namespace identifiers, now and in the future, that aren't so > abstract to be illegible? In other words, could one be stuck for a > meaningful short string ns ID because all the ones they wanted to use are in > use by others? > > Thanks for being persistent, anyway. Good questions, all. begin:vcard n:Chiusano;Joseph tel;work:(703) 902-6923 x-mozilla-html:FALSE url:www.bah.com org:Booz | Allen | Hamilton;IT Digital Strategies Team adr:;;8283 Greensboro Drive;McLean;VA;22012; version:2.1 email;internet:chiusano_joseph@b... title:Senior Consultant fn:Joseph M. Chiusano end:vcard
|
