How controversial are XML namespaces?
The need for XML namespaces and the basic idea that a two-part naming system (or something similar) is needed is not controversial. However, the design of XML namespaces — that is, the way XML namespaces are declared and used in an XML document — has, at times, been very controversial. (If you want to see just how controversial, go to the archives of the XML-DEV mailing list and search on the word “namespace” or look at some of the articles on Robin Cover’s Namespaces in XML page.) In spite of these problems, and the fact that XML namespaces will always have some very vocal detractors, most people have accepted and are using them. Furthermore, virtually all commercial XML tools and technologies support them.
The need for XML namespaces and the basic idea that a two-part naming system (or something similar) is needed is not controversial. However, the design of XML namespaces — that is, the way XML namespaces are declared and used in an XML documentmyths–> — has, at times, been very controversial. (If you want to see just how controversial, go to the archives of the XML-DEV mailing list and search on the word “namespace”.) Although XML namespaces still have some very vocal detractors, most people have accepted and are using them. Furthermore, most new XML tools and technologies use them, a state of affairs that is only likely to increase.
