VOEvent working draft published: version, param

[Tony Linde]

I mean that two different providers choose to use the same name for
different 'things'. The only way to avoid that is to have some sort of
centrally maintained list of names which people have to apply for and are
then allowed to use in their records (though how you'd police that I shudder
to imagine) or some sort of naming standard which prefixes names with a
provider acronym (which leads to a central list of acronyms ...).

Namespaces avoid that since each provider can, if they want, create elements
with whatever names are most suitable: clashes are thus avoided. An element
called gcn:IntentCnts has only one meaning; xyz:IntentCnts another meaning
(though the group creating the xyz namespaced extension could include
gcn:IntentCnts if that element in their records has the same meaning as the
gcn namespaced one).

Cheers,
Tony. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alasdair Allan [mailto:aa at astro.ex.ac.uk] 
> Sent: 25 June 2005 12:08
> To: Tony Linde
> Cc: voevent at ivoa.net
> Subject: RE: VOEvent working draft published: version, param
> 
> 
> > > >    <Param name="GCN_INTEN_CNTS" value="17467"/> and     
>                     
> > > >    <Param name="GCN_INTEN_CNTS" value="fred bloggs"/>      
> > >
> > > it's loosely typed, so yes, tis in theory would be allowed.
> > 
> > That was not the point I was making: I meant that the two <param>s 
> > referred to different items.
> 
> Sorry I don't follow...?
> 
> Al.
> 
>