[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: fixing (just) namespaces and validation

• From: james anderson <James.Anderson@m...>
• To: "xml-dev@i..." <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1999 19:07:45 +0200

David Carlisle wrote:
> 
> [in response to my claim, that]
> 
> > It is the parsers which cause the problem by ignoring the information
> > provided.
> 
> ...
> 
> Ah interesting. But then the `problem' is that there is no REC or NOTE
> or hint or suggestion from anyone in authority that namespace aware
> validating parsers are _supposed_ to interpret xmlns: attribute
> declarations in this way.

As the recommendation does not say anything about this, it does not prohibit
it. There was a discussion about this nine months ago (upon release of
rec-xml-names-19990114), at which time the authoritative opinion was that such
an interpretation was not intended by the specification, as it would invert
the validity-status of some documents. I argued then, and remain convined,
that that effect would be beneficial.

>


xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• References:
  • Re: fixing (just) namespaces and validation
    • From: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>

• Prev by Date: Re: fixing (just) namespaces and validation
• Next by Date: Re: Layers, again (was Re: fixing (just) namespaces and validation)
• Previous by thread: Re: fixing (just) namespaces and validation
• Next by thread: [XT] XSL output question
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread