At 09:53 AM 6/27/2005 -0700, Alec Flett wrote:
Wait, before we go any further trying to make xml namespaces work, I have
a suggestion:
Phillip J. Eby wrote:
Then we should get rid of XML namespaces altogether here; parcel
namespaces are *not* globally unique and never have been; repository
paths and Python package namespace requirements prevent them from being
globally unique.
+1 to removing all XML namespaces altogether, and here's a brainstorm
about how to do it We use them inappropriately anyway.
Well, as I've said before, it's not *really* inappropriate. There are
plenty of other XML applications that do the same thing; i.e. use XML
namespaces to define prefixes that are then also used in attribute
values. I pretty much consider that a logical extension of the use of XML
namespaces, and it avoids having to come up with other ways to spell
something that's basically the same thing.
I haven't completely flushed out this idea, but anyone else have any
thoughts or other approaches to removing the need for <foo:someKind> ?
I don't think that's necessary; XML namespaces are a perfectly valid way to
do this.
The main thing I'm trying to avoid with my proposal is the need to maintain
a mapping of things-that-aren't-unique-anyway to
things-that-we-meant-to-start-with. :)
About the only way I see to dodge XML namespace definitions altogether is
to use fully qualified element tags, e.g.::
<osaf.framework.blocks.Block.Block itsName="thisIsRidiculous">
...
</osaf.framework.blocks.Block.Block>
I think this is a pretty obvious non-starter, even if we were able to
flatten it to:
<osaf.gui.blocks.Block itsName="thisIsStillTooVerbose">
...
</osaf.gui.blocks.Block>
at a later time. This just won't work for the poor guy or gal writing the XML.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Dev" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
