Disappointed in “XML names and addresses”

Wednesday 2 April 2003This is 20 years old. Be careful.

Sean McGrath has written an article entitled A study in XML culture and evolution. It starts out well, making interesting observations about the differing culture between “document” people and “data” people. “Data” people believe in unique ids (names) for data, “document” people are satisfied with uniqueness among all the fields (addresses). Good point.

Being a “document” person, he doesn’t see the need for unique ids for his data. Fair enough. But then he tanks, making some sort of leap to the conclusion that since his data doesn’t need names, his XML doesn’t need namespaces. Huh? I’m hoping Sean was mis-edited, or maybe just had an off day. He seems otherwise to know what he is talking about. To confuse names for data with namespaces for names of attributes seems pretty basic to me.


Add a comment:

Ignore this:
Leave this empty:
Name is required. Either email or web are required. Email won't be displayed and I won't spam you. Your web site won't be indexed by search engines.
Don't put anything here:
Leave this empty:
Comment text is Markdown.