On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 1:18 AM, Ned Freed
<ned(_dot_)freed(_at_)mrochek(_dot_)com> wrote:
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 7:38 PM, Ned Freed
<ned(_dot_)freed(_at_)mrochek(_dot_)com> wrote:
Alexey Melnikov writes:
If we want to allow for magic comments, it make sense for them to be
in a separate namespace. But then magic comments are typically
implementation specific. So I unless we want to startadize them, I
don't think the document needs another namespace.
Each generator may want to use a namespace of its own for its particular
foo. I am not an expert in this. If that's considered good XML taste,
then that should be illustrated in an example or two.
I certainly want to allow that - indeed, I don't know of a way to disallow
it.
But I don't want to require this approach.
AFACT the current draft does not allow mixing of namespaces
Say what? All the current draft does is define a way to represent Sieve
scripts
in XML. Nowhere does it specify how the resulting representation is to be
used.
It could be used as a standalone thing where a given XML object only contains
Sieve content and nothing else. Or it could be used to embed Sieve material
inside of some more general sort of XML content (of course using namespaces to
keep things clear) - which in fact is exactly one of the ways we're using it.
You appear to be confusing this specification with others the IETF has done
that use XML as part of defining a protocol, e.g., XMPP. In such cases where
the goal is specifically for clients and servers written by different people
to
be able to interoperate and that means there have to be tight constraints on
what can appear on the wire.
no, not at all
i'll explain at more length what i meant
the draft does not allow xml from other namespaces within sieve
fragments. for example (assuming sieve is the default namespace and
mix is some other namespace), the following is excluded by the current
draft schema:
<control name="if">
<mix:editor-specific foo='bar'></mix:editor-specific>
<test name="header">
<tag>is</tag>
<str>Sender</str>
<str>owner-ietf-mta-filters(_at_)imc(_dot_)org</str>
</test>
<action name="fileinto">
<str>filter</str>
</action> <comment>move to "filter" mailbox</comment>
</control>
does my comment make sense now?
- robert