• From: "Pete Cordell" <petexmldev@c...>
• To: "David Lee" <dlee@c...>,"'Michael Kay'" <mike@s...>,<xml-dev@l...>
• Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 11:42:14 +0100

Original Message From: "David Lee"

> Re Pete's
> =====
> ".  But I believe that there are new XML uses created everyday
> that are essentially islands.  These XML uses could quite easily adopt an
> alternative non-backwards compatible method of namespaces with very little
> pain, and quite a lot of gain."
> =====
>
> I suggest that if its islands you're interested in (as I often am) then 
> the
> simpler solution is simply not to use namespaces.   Out of 10 years 
> working
> with XML there are only a few times i've *HAD* to use namespaces, and 
> those
> are integrating with or using  other vocabularies that already required
> namespaces.
>
> In all my "island" work I dont bother with namespaces at all.

That's a good point David.  But I do believe that a number of XML 
applications communicate via the sea (!!!!) of the Internet and for that 
reason I like to include some namespace information in the XML instances.

Pete Cordell
Codalogic Ltd
Interface XML to C++ the easy way using C++ XML
data binding to convert XSD schemas to C++ classes.
Visit http://codalogic.com/lmx/ or http://www.xml2cpp.com
for more info
Twitter: http://twitter.com/petecordell

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: XML Namespaces 1.1
    • From: "David Lee" <dlee@c...>

• References:
  • XML Namespaces 1.1
    • From: Rick Yorgason <rick@f...>
  • Re: XML Namespaces 1.1
    • From: Liam R E Quin <liam@w...>
  • Re: XML Namespaces 1.1
    • From: Rick Yorgason <rick@f...>
  • Re: XML Namespaces 1.1
    • From: Michael Fuller <MICHAEL.S.FULLER@s...>
  • Re: XML Namespaces 1.1
    • From: "Pete Cordell" <petexmldev@c...>
  • Re: XML Namespaces 1.1
    • From: Michael Kay <mike@s...>
  • Re: XML Namespaces 1.1
    • From: "Pete Cordell" <petexmldev@c...>
  • RE: XML Namespaces 1.1
    • From: "David Lee" <dlee@c...>