> I'd be more interested in someone who can point out the the difficulty
> caused by namespaces in XML that don't boil down to philosophical or
> aesthetic arguments.
Right, right. There's no problem there, really. It's just "philosophy"
and "aesthetics" on which we've wasted the past four years.
The wisdom of:
* Scoped attribute declarations
* URIs as name components
* QNames in general
* attributes left out of the default namespace
is just so obvious, that what were we thinking? (I'm sure I left
something out of that list.)
I really hope Tyler Baker has found something better to think about.
-------------
Simon St.Laurent - SSL is my TLA
http://simonstl.com may be my URI
http://monasticxml.org may be my ascetic URI
urn:oid:1.3.6.1.4.1.6320 is another possibility altogether
