cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stephan Michels <>
Subject Re: Semantic analysis of the namespace URI used in Cocoon HEAD
Date Tue, 29 Apr 2003 15:56:18 GMT

On 29 Apr 2003, Martin Holz wrote:

> Stefano Mazzocchi <> writes:
> > First of all, the *default* pattern for Cocoon namespaces is
> >
> >[name]/[major.minor]
> >
> > where
> >
> >  name -> indicates the concept to which the namespace is connected
> >  major.minor -> the version of the namespace
> Would a minor number ever be useful? Its important to understand,
> that a namespace is not directly related to a certain version
> of a DTD or any other format specification. If there is a minor
> or even a major version change of a document format, the namespace
> should stay the same, because most elements would still mean the same
> and could be processes by the same software.
> If the semantics of a  elements change during the evolution of
> a document format you would better introduce a new element,
> not a new namespace.
> Namespaces are for mixing data from different companies and
> domains, where the designers of one format are not aware of the
> the other format. Formats from the same organization, especially
> different format versions should not need namespaces at all, since
> they are hopefully designed interoperable from the start.
> Okay, the namespaces already exist and its only names, so it
> would be the easiest to keep the existing pattern, bit please
> avoid creating namespace variants based on version numbers.

I agree here, you doesn't gain a benefit using a version within
a namespace. The namespaces should only help to get an information,
where these element come from. Moreover, using versions allows to
use different version of the same element within a document.

So here my -1,

Stephan Michels.

View raw message