I predict that sometime around 2025, we will end up redefining namespaces because the number of jQuery-like components have ballooned into the millions, the web has descended once again into a sea of interoperability, and registries will, once again, have proven to be a bottleneck, as they have EVERY SINGLE TIME they have been implemented.
Of course, they won't be called namespaces, and they'll probably use a dash instead of a colon , and they definitely won't be XML based because everyone knows that XML is EVIL ... (sigh) ! Kurt Cagle Principle Evangelist, Semantic Technologies Avalon Consulting, LLC kurt.ca...@gmail.com, personal cag...@avalonconsult.com, business 443-837-8725 On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalm...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 8:31 AM, Glen <glen...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I know I'm rather late to the party, but I've been doing a lot of reading > > lately about web components and related technologies, and the one thing > that > > confounds me is the fact that web components appear not to have any > "real" > > namespacing. > > Prefix-based informal namespacing appears to be more than sufficient > for 90%+ of use-cases. It works fine, for example, for the huge > collection of jQuery widgets/extensions. Complicating things further > simply isn't all that necessary. > > We do plan to help solve it at some point, as Dimitri says, as there > are some cases where real namespacing is useful. In particular, if > you have a name that you can assume is globally unique with high > confidence, you can actually share custom elements across documents. > Within a single page, however, prefix-based informal namespaces are > nearly always sufficient. > > XML Namespaces are a pox on the platform, however, and they'll > definitely not get reproduced in custom elements. They have a number > of terrible affordances. > > ~TJ > >