Subject: RE: [xsl] Namespaces conventions: Why ALWAYS "http:..." tags ? From: "Michael Kay" <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 12:49:52 -0000 |
> Much more can be said about pros/cons and naming. I > personally, after getting used to it, have found it rather > convenient to use http URLs and it saved me many headaches of > having to think of yet another naming convention. I resisted "http" in namespaces for a long time because the "p" stands for "protocol" and this gives the misleading impression that some network communication is involved. But I know when I've lost a fight, and I now go along with the flow. It's stupid, but you get used to it. Historically, there has always been a camp that believed that namespace URIs should in fact identify a resource, for example a RDDL document. In fact, namespaces allocated by W3C do (by convention) always identify a document that gives you a description of the namespace and a pointer to its specification. Michael Kay http://www.saxonica.com/
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] Namespaces conventions: W, Abel Braaksma | Thread | Re: [xsl] Namespaces conventions: W, Colin Adams |
Re: [xsl] Namespaces conventions: W, Abel Braaksma | Date | Re: [xsl] Namespaces conventions: W, Colin Adams |
Month |