• To: "'bryan rasmussen'" <rasmussen.bryan@g...>
• Subject: RE: RE: Namespaces A Mess? (was: Candle 0.8 - a new scripting language for XML)
• From: "Michael Kay" <mike@s...>
• Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 17:46:14 +0100
• Cc: <xml-dev@l...>
• In-reply-to: <3bb44c6e0510160009w47cc47b0q765e3fc096d06830@m...>
• Thread-index: AcXSIHyHk2dHIzycQYOl128roYrkswAUCAAg

> Other than that though I don't see how anyone could ever argue that
> prefixes are information bearing.
> 
> Has anyone made this argument?

Yes: see http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xml-c14n-20010315#NoNSPrefixRewriting
> 
> 
> >
> > (f) DTDs are an intrinsic part of XML, but DTDs are not 
> namespace-aware.
> Are DTDs really an intrinsic part of XML? This seems so 1999.
> 
> Let's assume that DTDs and namespaces are at odds, it seems that
> namespaces are the clear winners in their battle. I hardly ever see
> DTDs to do validation anymore, only to shove some entities in.
>
I think that DTDs are still very widely used.

Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.com/ 

• References:
  • Re: RE: Namespaces A Mess? (was: Candle 0.8 - a new scripting language for XML)
    • From: bryan rasmussen <rasmussen.bryan@g...>

• Prev by Date: Re: RE: Namespaces A Mess? (was: Candle 0.8 - a new scripting language for XML)
• Next by Date: Update your Paypal!
• Previous by thread: Re: RE: Namespaces A Mess? (was: Candle 0.8 - a new scripting language for XML)
• Next by thread: Update your Paypal!
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread