• From: John Cowan <cowan@m...>
• To: Pete Cordell <petexmldev@c...>
• Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2011 11:53:04 -0400

Pete Cordell scripsit:

> By this argument 'name' is not ambiguous because of its context.
> In fact its quite easy to define a schema that has multiple 'name'
> elements with different meanings.  I believe some would say that is
> bad design though.

But are the meanings really different?  A name is a name.  Here's a
better example:

<book>
  <title>Mary Barton</title>
  <author>
    <nameProfile>
      <purpose>legal</purpose>
      <givenName>Elizabeth</givenName>
      <familyName>Gaskell</familyName>
    </nameProfile>
    <nameProfile>
      <purpose>authorial</purpose>
      <title>Mrs.</title>
      <familyName>Gaskell</familyName>
    </nameProfile>
  </author>
</book>

Here there is genuine ambiguity between the title of a book and the
title of a person.  The name profile schema I mentioned in my last
post uses "prefix" instead.  But even if it didn't, the context would
disambiguate between book/title and nameProfile/title.

-- 
Values of beeta will give rise to dom!          John Cowan
(5th/6th edition 'mv' said this if you tried    http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
to rename '.' or '..' entries; see              cowan@c...
http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/who/dmr/odd.html)

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: HTML5 and almost no namespaces
    • From: Andrew Welch <andrew.j.welch@g...>
  • RE: HTML5 and almost no namespaces
    • From: "David Lee" <dlee@c...>

• References:
  • HTML5 and almost no namespaces
    • From: Jesper Tverskov <jesper.tverskov@g...>
  • Re: HTML5 and almost no namespaces
    • From: Stephen D Green <stephengreenubl@g...>
  • Re: HTML5 and almost no namespaces
    • From: Mukul Gandhi <gandhi.mukul@g...>
  • Re: HTML5 and almost no namespaces
    • From: "Pete Cordell" <petexmldev@c...>