• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: QNames in attribute values
• From: John Cowan <cowan@m...>
• Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 07:50:39 -0500 (EST)
• In-reply-to: <3C566974.5070800@d...> from Eric van der Vlist at "Jan29, 2002 10:20:52 am"

Evan Lenz wrote:

> XML Schemas, Canonical XML, and other specs rely on the prefixes and scope
> of namespace declarations as significant information to be passed to the
> application, rather than just a lexical mechanism to resolve element and
> attribute names. 

Canonical XML only preserves namespace prefixes because *other specs*
depend on them, and so it can't afford to throw them away.  Earlier
versions regenerated the prefixes, but that meant that a Canonical
version of an XSLT stylesheet wouldn't function correctly.

RELAX NG swings both ways: it has an inheritable "ns" attribute,
but can also use QNames.

-- 
John Cowan           http://www.ccil.org/~cowan              cowan@c...
To say that Bilbo's breath was taken away is no description at all.  There
are no words left to express his staggerment, since Men changed the language
that they learned of elves in the days when all the world was wonderful.
        --_The Hobbit_

• References:
  • Re: QNames in attribute values
    • From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@d...>

• Prev by Date: Re: ignoring elements in certain namespace in schema?
• Next by Date: Are Updates really needed in XQuery?
• Previous by thread: Re: QNames in attribute values
• Next by thread: RE: QNames in attribute values
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread