superrcat

eddwo wrote:

Arn't namespace prefixes irrelevant?

<xmlns="cf:http://www.microsoft.com/schemas/rss/core/2005">
 <cf:blah/>

is the same as
<xmlns="MSList:http://www.microsoft.com/schemas/rss/core/2005">
 <MSList:blah/>
The prefix is just used by the parser to map back to the namespace URI. 
So long as the URI is correct, and the prefix 
is used consistently within the document, what the prefix actually is
doesn't effect the end result.

To the parser, no, the value of the namespace does not matter if it is referenced consistently within the document, but then again, neither does the element name. You could have <a:b> instead of <simplelist:listinfo>, the point was to make it easy to understand without having both the parser and the developer to read an entire schema.

You should really use a more concise namespace prefix for your proposed RSS extension instead of cf.

"Do a good job naming your elements prefixes. No one wants to deal with an element of <wqe412> when <color> is a lot more understandable.

Do a good job with your namespace prefix too. woot is crap when shirt makes more sense (combining this with the above maxim, you've got <shirt:color> instead of <woot:wqe412>)."

Quoted material gratuitously borrowed from http://www.disobey.com/detergent/2002/extendingrss2.