Print

Print


On Jan 25, 2005, at 6:24 PM, Andrew E Switala wrote:

> You're right that even one unneeded namespace is too many, but I was
> addressing your assertion of increased stylesheet complexity due to
> namespaces. Suppose MODS didn't use XLink, but declared its own "href"
> attribute. Would a transformation from MODS, assuming it handled href
> in the first place, be made any simpler by ditching the one namespace?
> Stylesheet complxity is a function of the number of elements and
> attributes, and of the number of modes, but I don't see where the
> number of namespaces enters into it.

I don't think the jump in complexity is huge, but one only need read
through the xsl list archives to see how common namespace confusion is
to be weary about making things any more complicated than they need to
be (this not even considering editor support, BTW).  Arguably this is a
largely a beginner's problem -- that one either understands namespaces
or not -- but I tend to think that's not quite the case.  My comfort
level with namespaces is pretty good these days, but I run into times
where something goes wrong and it takes me awhile to figure out it's
because of a namespace issue.

Conceptually it's easier to think "if I need a title for a mods record,
then I want mods:title".  Likewise, if I'm dealing with MODS records
that have xlinked content, I'd rather think in terms of matching
mads:mads[@ID={@xlink:href}]//mads:title.

I suppose this all is debatable, but it's a valid perspective.  In any
case, the cart (legitimate end-user needs/interests) should be before
the horse (implementation details).

Bruce