Pete Cordell scripsit:
> By this argument 'name' is not ambiguous because of its context.
> In fact its quite easy to define a schema that has multiple 'name'
> elements with different meanings. I believe some would say that is
> bad design though.
But are the meanings really different? A name is a name. Here's a
better example:
<book>
<title>Mary Barton</title>
<author>
<nameProfile>
<purpose>legal</purpose>
<givenName>Elizabeth</givenName>
<familyName>Gaskell</familyName>
</nameProfile>
<nameProfile>
<purpose>authorial</purpose>
<title>Mrs.</title>
<familyName>Gaskell</familyName>
</nameProfile>
</author>
</book>
Here there is genuine ambiguity between the title of a book and the
title of a person. The name profile schema I mentioned in my last
post uses "prefix" instead. But even if it didn't, the context would
disambiguate between book/title and nameProfile/title.
--
Values of beeta will give rise to dom! John Cowan
(5th/6th edition 'mv' said this if you tried http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
to rename '.' or '..' entries; see
http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/who/dmr/odd.html)
