English version
Accueil     À propos     Téléchargement     Ressources     Contactez-nous    

Ce site est rarement mis à jour. Pour les informations les plus récentes, rendez-vous sur le nouveau site OCaml à l'adresse ocaml.org.

Browse thread
RE: [Caml-list] Namespace proposal
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2002-08-30 (22:51)
From: Blair Zajac <blair@o...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Namespace proposal: XML variant
Jeffrey Palmer wrote:
> On Friday 30 August 2002 01:02 pm, Alessandro Baretta wrote:
> > I thoroughly dislike any "package ~= directory" solution,
> > yet I think a namespace construct should be present in the
> > language in order to allow interoperability between
> > different projects with different naming conventions. I
> > propose a scheme à la XML, where namespaces are URIs
> > belonging to the person or organization which releases the
> > associated code.
> >
> > I propose to add an optional namespace construct to
> > explicitly associate namespace URIs with namespace names.
> >
> > namespace MyBigProject = "http://alexbaretta.com/big_project/"
> >
> >
> Eeek!
> Please, let's not entertain any of the rampant stupidity that the W3C seems so
> mired in. I've always thought that the concept of using URIs for namespaces,
> parameter settings, etc., was the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen. I
> mean, let's be honest here - HTTP is a network _protocol_, and it has nothing
> to do with anything namespace or parameter related. The thing that really
> irks me about the whole scheme is that most of the time these aren't even
> _valid_ URIs (i.e., inaccessible).
> I'm all for a hierarchical namespace that's not related to the filesystem (In
> Java it always ended up causing headaches for large projects - compilers that
> "intelligently" put your compiled code in the correct package directory,
> etc.). It seems that the question of segmenting libraries according to
> directory should be a decision that's left up to the implementor, as it is
> currently.
> All of this is, of course, my own opinion, so take it with the corresponding
> pinch of salt.
> Cheers,

Tag URI may be a good choice.


    The tag algorithm lets people create character strings which no
    one else using the same algorithm could ever create. It is simple
    enough to do in your head, and the resulting strings can be easy
    to read, write, and remember. You can use the strings wherever
    you need a unique identifier conforming to the URI (URL) Syntax 

They look like this:



Blair Zajac <blair@orcaware.com>
Web and OS performance plots - http://www.orcaware.com/orca/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners