[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: QNames
> / James Clark <jjc@jclark.com> was heard to say: > [...] > | add an additional inherited attribute "datatypeNamespace" which can be > | specified on any element (similar to the "ns" attribute). The type > | attribute on <data> and <value> would be an NCName. The inherited value of > | the datatypeNamespace attribute would determine the URI of the datatype for > | <data> and <value>. (If we do this, we should rename the "ns" attribute, > | perhaps to "namespace".) > > I wonder if this is going to be much more confusing in even the simple > cases of mixed datatype namespaces. Suppose I have two datatype > namespaces, foo and bar. Using QNames, I'd probably say things like > this: > > <data type="foo:number"/> > ... > <data type="bar:number"/> > > With the inherited dataNamespace, this will be: > > <data type="number"/> > ... > <data type="number"/> > > And I'll have to go back in the document looking for the nearest > enclosing dataNamespace. The assumption underlying the datatypeNamespace idea is that mixing datatype namespaces will be relatively unusual. I'm guessing that most of the time people will use XML Schema Part 2 by itself, or in the long term some other simpler datatype system by itself. I would agree that if people have to mix datatype namespaces often, QNames work better. James
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC