Re: [dita] Those XML mention names

[Kristen James Eberlein <kris@eberleinconsulting.com>]

What Dick and Eliot said :)

I also became comfortable with the aesthetics of the "xm-" prefix, once 
I read it a x(ml)m(ention).

Best,
Kris

Kristen James Eberlein
Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee
Principal consultant, Eberlein Consulting
www.eberleinconsulting.com
+1 919 682-2290; kriseberlein (skype)

On 8/19/2014 5:28 PM, Eliot Kimber wrote:
> I have to agree with Dick: the letter of the XML spec is clear and I think
> we have to adhere to it. At a minimum, not doing so would put the whole
> DITA 1.3 schedule at serious risk since it would only take one reviewer to
> make a stink for us to have to change.
>
> It's certainly my fault for not having remembered (or noticed
> subsequently) this constraint in the XML spec, but at least we noticed it
> now while it's relatively easy to change.
>
> Cheers,
>
> E.
> —————
> Eliot Kimber, Owner
> Contrext, LLC
> http://contrext.com
>
>
>
>
> On 8/19/14, 4:21 PM, "Richard Hamilton" <hamilton@xmlpress.net> wrote:
>
> > Hi Tom,
> >
> > Interesting information from George, and a reasonable interpretation.
> >
> > I would argue against using xml in these names. While the risk may be
> > low, the consequences would be pretty bad if W3C decided to use one of
> > those names. I would also argue that "reserved" is for all practical
> > purposes "invalid" for anyone except W3C.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Dick
> > -------
> > XML Press
> > XML for Technical Communicators
> > http://xmlpress.net
> > hamilton@xmlpress.net
> >
> >
> >
> > On Aug 19, 2014, at 2:04 PM, Tom Magliery <tom.magliery@justsystems.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I mentioned to George Bina our discovery about the element names in the
> > > XML-mention domain. Mostly I was just expressing my surprise that no one
> > > of us had noticed before, presumably because no tools flagged those
> > > element names as being any kind of problem in a DTD. I confirmed for
> > > myself (both in and outside of DITA) that XMetaL certainly doesn't, and
> > > George confirmed that oXygen doesn't either. He thought that some
> > > earlier versions of Xerces might have given warnings.
> > >   
> > > He raised a good point about why this is correct behaviour for the
> > > tools: The spec doesn't say that these names are invalid, just that
> > > they're reserved for future W3C use. If W3C were to use such names in a
> > > DTD someday, we wouldn't want our tools rejecting their DTDs.
> > >   
> > > He also suggested (and I agree) that our decision to use/not use these
> > > names is therefore a risk/benefit analysis: What is the risk, should we
> > > decide to use the names "xmlelement", "xmlatt", etc., that W3C would
> > > come along one day and declare that the names are going to serve some
> > > official, other purpose?
> > >   
> > > Maybe we should weigh that against the aesthetics of these names
> > > compared with the "xm-" versions, before we make our final decision.
> > >   
> > > mag
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> > generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php