WFS: why not use the default namespace?

[Bart van den Eijnden (OSGIS)]

Hi Tom,

thanks for the agreement.

Wrt the OGR GML code, we had a lot of discussion there as well. Now it 
just replaces : by _ for attributes.

Their argument is that if it would take off all namespaces, there could 
be name clashes for attributes. That seems a reasonable enough argument.

Best regards,
Bart

Kralidis,Tom [Burlington] wrote:

>Hi,
>
>I agree w/ Bart here.  I would prefer to use a default namespace (i.e. xmlns=...), as opposed to explicitly specifying this in the output, for elements not carried by gml: or wfs:.  The default namespace would be either what the user defines in wfs_namespace_uri, or, if not specified, would default to "http://mapserver.gis.umn.edu/mapserver".
>
>Having said this, I'm not sure how much of this is in MapServer code vs. the OGR GML code.
>
>..Tom
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From:	UMN MapServer Users List on behalf of Bart van den Eijnden (OSGIS)
>Sent:	Wed 26-Jul-06 14:39
>To:	MAPSERVER-USERS at LISTS.UMN.EDU
>Cc:	
>Subject:	[UMN_MAPSERVER-USERS] WFS: why not use the default namespace?
>
>Hi list,
>
>why doesn't Mapserver WFS use the default namespace, i.e.:
>
>xmlns="http://mapserver.gis.umn.edu/mapserver"
>
>so that it does not have to put ms: in front of all the elements?
>
>I am asking this since we have a problem converting Mapserver GML into 
>ESRI Shapefile using ogr2ogr. The attribute names will come out as 
>ms_XXXX which confuses users who are also familiar with the native data.
>
>Hope to hear some thoughts on this.
>
>Best regards,
>Bart
>
>  
>


-- 
Bart van den Eijnden
OSGIS, Open Source GIS
http://www.osgis.nl