Comments on: XML namespaces are a Good Thing http://dowhatimean.net/2006/02/xml-namespaces Richard Cyganiak's Weblog Tue, 06 Jan 2009 02:15:53 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Richard Cyganiak http://dowhatimean.net/2006/02/xml-namespaces#comment-5192 Richard Cyganiak Sun, 26 Feb 2006 22:38:05 +0000 http://dowhatimean.net/2006/02/xml-namespaces#comment-5192 <p>David, that’s a good point, and a flaw in his argument that I didn’t notice.</p> <p>However, even if the format designer didn’t think of this, any XML format may be used in a situation where being in a namespace makes things easier, like sending it as a SOAP payload or doing any nontrivial transformation with XSLT. Using a namespace is a good precaution and good practice.</p> <p>It also won’t bloat your XML if you use a default namespace declaration. All you have to add is <code>xmlns=&#8221;http://example.com/my-namespace-uri/&#8221;</code> on the root element.</p> David, that’s a good point, and a flaw in his argument that I didn’t notice.

However, even if the format designer didn’t think of this, any XML format may be used in a situation where being in a namespace makes things easier, like sending it as a SOAP payload or doing any nontrivial transformation with XSLT. Using a namespace is a good precaution and good practice.

It also won’t bloat your XML if you use a default namespace declaration. All you have to add is xmlns=&#8221;http://example.com/my-namespace-uri/&#8221; on the root element.

]]> By: David http://dowhatimean.net/2006/02/xml-namespaces#comment-5191 David Sun, 26 Feb 2006 21:49:17 +0000 http://dowhatimean.net/2006/02/xml-namespaces#comment-5191 <p>Sorry, I forget to identify myself at the preceding comment… :)</p> Sorry, I forget to identify myself at the preceding comment… :)

]]> By: Anonymous http://dowhatimean.net/2006/02/xml-namespaces#comment-5190 Anonymous Sun, 26 Feb 2006 21:48:02 +0000 http://dowhatimean.net/2006/02/xml-namespaces#comment-5190 <p>“So why don’t namespaces have this [an object behind an URI]? Simple answer: because they didn’t need them in order to be useful. That’s the beauty of the Web: it’s agile methods at work–the simplest thing that could possibly work.” (Kimber)</p> <p>I think this gives a hint why people often create XML documents that are not namespace-bound: They don’t need namespaces to be useful in their context. Even further, namespace usage would mean that much XML code would need to be added, like (long) namespace URIs and (many many) prefixes.</p> “So why don’t namespaces have this [an object behind an URI]? Simple answer: because they didn’t need them in order to be useful. That’s the beauty of the Web: it’s agile methods at work–the simplest thing that could possibly work.” (Kimber)

I think this gives a hint why people often create XML documents that are not namespace-bound: They don’t need namespaces to be useful in their context. Even further, namespace usage would mean that much XML code would need to be added, like (long) namespace URIs and (many many) prefixes.

]]>