> -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- > Från: Lars Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Skickat: den 28 november 2000 14:58 > Till: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Ämne: Re: Comments on Requirements and WD > > > > On Tue, 28 Nov 2000 10:30:50 +0100 > Gannholm Torbjörn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [snip] > > > In the working-draft we have a lot of elements that are > exact copies of > > their xsl-counterparts. I think it would be better, both > for design and > > clarity, if those elements were taken from the > xsl-namespace instead. So > > that instead of <xupdate:element> we would write <xsl:element>. > > The XML Update Language is a separated application domain. > Why do you think > it would be better to mix these different namespaces == > application domains? > The intention of the current WD was to provide a simple and > powerfull update > language. I don't believe that every user of the XML Update > Language would > know the semantics of XSL/XSLT. >
This is probably very much a matter of opininion, but the way the thinking goes with creating standard documents/elements, you would tend to borrow elements from other namespaces instead of creating your own version of the element. Especially if the idea is that they should work the same way. The reason is that we wish to avoid a large flora of similar elements. I could refer to my "hund" instead of my "dog", but then you might have to check if the Swedish word "hund" has exactly the same meaning as the German one, and especially also check if there is any subtle difference between a "hund" and a "dog". The same goes for xml-elements. If they are the same, call them the same, if not, then make your own definition. If we create a table, we are recommended to use <xhtml:table> instead of <ourOwn:table> if it is the same type of element. Why reinvent the wheel unless you really need an oval wheel? I agree that not every user of XUpdate will know XSLT, but the chance is rather big that they eventually will, and in any case, the use of multiple namespaces within an xml-document is not likely to be a strange concept but rather the way it is done. But, of course, there might be a good reason for having a new almost identical element. [snip] /Torbjörn Gannholm ------------------------------------------------------------------ Post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] adminstrator: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Read archived messages: http://archive.xmldb.org/ ------------------------------------------------------------------
