[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: [OASIS Issue Tracker] Commented: (CMIS-10) ReconsiderelementFormDefault="qualified"
[ http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/CMIS-10?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=10116#action_10116 ]
Julian Reschke commented on CMIS-10:
------------------------------------
I just informed myself about what "unqualified" means (surprise!), and I have to agree with Florent on this.
> Reconsider elementFormDefault="qualified"
> -----------------------------------------
>
> Key: CMIS-10
> URL: http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/CMIS-10
> Project: OASIS Content Management Interoperability Services TC
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Domain Model
> Affects Versions: Draft 0.50
> Reporter: Gary Gershon
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: Draft 0.52
>
>
> The Draft 0.50 schemas specify elementFormDefault="qualified" which results in prefixing of XML elements with a namespace identifier.
> Thus our messages would have a format similar to <cmis:ElementName> instead of simply <ElementName>.
> Some tools do not allow the user to specify "pretty" prefixes like "cmis", so the actual qualified XML might look like <bons7:ElementName> where bons7 (business-object-namespace-7) was earlier mapped to our CMIS domain namespace via a xmlns:bons7="..." attribute.
> This adds complexity and bulk to authoring and reading XML messages and I am unaware of any substantive benefit.
> Major vendor XML tooling create schemas that leave the elements unqualified without observable negative impact.
> A "Best Practices" site for XML (http://www.xfront.com/HideVersusExpose.html) recommends leaving elements unqualified "when simplicity, readability, and understandability of instance documents is of utmost importance".
> Unless there is a compelling argument for using "qualified" elements, I think the group should should similarly favor "simplicity, readability, and understandability" for our XML messages and allow this schema specifier to default to "unqualified".
> Could one of the participants from the original draft group provide some insight on the basis for this earlier decision?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]