Hi pje,
-1 : I don't like this idea, because it conflicts with the notion that
XML namespaces are supposed to be URIs, disambiguated from all other
namespace names by the domain name embedded in them. Yes, by using
"parcel:" instead of "http:", you're avoiding conflicts with other http
URIs, but introducing the potential for conflict (however unlikely) with
someone else who arbitrarily breaks the same rule and picks "parcel:".
(I'm guessing that there are also issues with how third parties pick
their namespaces to avoid conflicting with ours...)
...Bryan
Phillip J. Eby wrote:
Now that all Chandler parcels are using the schema API, we have the
option of getting rid of the messy 'http:' URIs for defining parcel
namespaces. I'd like to propose that we move to a "parcel:" URI
scheme, of the form "parcel:osaf.framework.blocks" This would let us
use the same names in parcel.xml as we would use in Python code,
making the namespaces easier for humans to read, write, and remember.
Basically, we would go from this:
<core:Parcel xmlns:core="http://osafoundation.org/parcels/core";
xmlns="http://osafoundation.org/parcels/osaf/framework/blocks";
xmlns:main="http://osafoundation.org/parcels/osaf/views/main";
xmlns:detail="http://osafoundation.org/parcels/osaf/framework/blocks/detail";
xmlns:amazon="http://osafoundation.org/parcels/osaf/examples/amazon";
xmlns:doc="http://osafoundation.org/parcels/osaf/examples/amazon";>
To this:
<core:Parcel
xmlns:core="parcel:core"
xmlns="parcel:osaf.framework.blocks"
xmlns:main="parcel:osaf.views.main"
xmlns:detail="parcel:osaf.framework.blocks.detail"
xmlns:amazon="parcel:osaf.examples.amazon"
xmlns:doc="parcel:osaf.examples.amazon">
Any thoughts?
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Dev" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Dev" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
