• To: "'Simon St.Laurent'" <simonstl@s...>
• Subject: RE: WARNING: Namespace thread virus (new variant?)
• From: Jeff Lowery <Jeff.Lowery@c...>
• Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2004 14:27:02 -0800
• Cc: "Xml-Dev (xml-dev@l...)" <xml-dev@l...>

Ah, POND. Dim recollections; although I think I missed this post, I seem to
recall you bringing up the acronym on a few occasions.

Looks like you're using the outer-most namespace as the "true" namespace,
with the inner namespaces used for type identification. That's a fourth
approach to signifying standard types that I could add to the three I posted
earlier. 

When good ideas go bad, bad ideas sound better.

-- Jeff

"No more Schema,
 No more tools, 
 No more dirty parsing rules."

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:simonstl@s...] 
> Sent: Monday, February 02, 2004 12:59 PM
> To: Jeff.Lowery@c...
> Subject: WARNING: Namespace thread virus (new variant?)
> 
> I mentioned something like this long ago at:
> 
> http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/200212/msg00443.html
> 

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: RE: WARNING: Namespace thread virus (new variant?)
    • From: "Jeff Rafter" <lists@j...>

• Prev by Date: RE: best practice for providing newsfeeds ?
• Next by Date: RE: best practice for providing newsfeeds ?
• Previous by thread: Re: WARNING: Namespace thread virus (new variant?)
• Next by thread: Re: RE: WARNING: Namespace thread virus (new variant?)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread