• From: "Costello, Roger L." <costello@m...>
• To: "xml-dev@l..." <xml-dev@l...>
• Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 06:00:54 -0400

David Carlisle made this excellent statement:

> since a namespace is (presumably) a space (set) of names, it makes more 
> sense to talk of names being in the namespace than bound to it.
> The prefix on the other hand isn't in the namespace but just 
> associated (bound) to it in each instance document.

The lesson I learned from David's statement is this:

     Things outside of a set are said to 
     be "bound" (associated) to the set.

Correct?


Consider this instance document element:

--------------------------------------------------------------------
<bk:ISBN xmlns:bk="http://www.books.org">978-0-9844425-0-8</bk:ISBN>
--------------------------------------------------------------------

I have learned from our discussions that this is correct terminology:

(a) The namespace prefix "bk" is _bound_ to the namespace http://www.books.org

(b) The name "ISBN" is _in_ the namespace http://www.books.org


QUESTION 

What is the correct terminology when talking about the markup and the value "978-0-9844425-0-8"? 

"978-0-9844425-0-8" is just one of a set of values. The markup is associated to that particular value. 

Is this correct terminology: 

     {http://www.books.org}ISBN is _bound_ to "978-0-9844425-0-8"

/Roger

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Correct usage of the terms "bind", "binding", "bound", "in"?
    • From: ht@i... (Henry S. Thompson)
  • Re: Correct usage of the terms "bind", "binding", "bound","in"?
    • From: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>

• References:
  • RE: What is the correct terminology for an element andits namespace?
    • From: "Costello, Roger L." <costello@m...>
  • Re: What is the correct terminology for an element andits namespace?
    • From: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>