[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [office-comment] Section 1.5 - implementations SHOULD use the namespace prefixes given.
On Monday 25 October 2004 17:24, Uche Ogbuji wrote: > [...] > I also agree with Michael that disallowing people from using the default > namespace will result in needless space bloat across the board. I'd > certainly prefer my OOXML application to use > > <styles xmlns="urn:oasis:names:tc:openoffice:xmlns:office:1.0">... > > rather than > > <office:styles > xmlns:office="urn:oasis:names:tc:openoffice:xmlns:office:1.0">... This is rather about <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <office:document-content xmlns:office="urn:oasis:names:tc:openoffice:xmlns:office:1.0" [...]> <office:styles> .... <office:automatic-styles> .... etc. I.e. the definition of the 'office' prefix (for namespace-aware parsers) is done only once. -> not much bloat. It also avoids some name clashes which would happen with some element names -- the point is that the OOXML specification defines many namespaces (and prefixes), not just one. The elements from the various namespaces are really intermixed, one can't just use a default namespace, most of the time. Example: <office:text> <text:numbered-paragraph text:level="1" text:style-name="L1"> ... </office:text> And this (always using the same prefixes on saving) is what the implementers of the spec (i.e. OpenOffice.org and KOffice) do currently, so I don't think mandating this would be a big problem. Yes, I can see which advantages real namespace support brings (well, for those writing XML by hand....) but the disadvantages seem bigger currently, as long as namespace-support isn't that widespread in all the XML tools people use. -- David Faure, faure@kde.org, sponsored by Trolltech to work on KDE, Konqueror (http://www.konqueror.org), and KOffice (http://www.koffice.org).
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]