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

RE: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)

• To: "'W. E. Perry'" <wperry@f...>
• Subject: RE: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
• From: "Hodder, Ed" <Ed.Hodder@B...>
• Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 15:55:15 -0400
• Cc: XML DEV <xml-dev@l...>

Walter Perry wrote:

> But my question was whether (and if so, why) we could 
> reasonably expect a
> discernible difference in the semantic outcome from 
> processing a particular
> instance of a single given attribute in no namespace as if it 
> were 'in the
> namespace' of the element which it modifies.

Maybe not in the context of that element within that instance. But what if
that element is compared with other elements from various namespaces. If the
attribute exists in no namespace it could be considered to be a universal
attribute. The attribute is common across several (or all?) namespaces. 

So are non-scoped attributes archetypal? 

Ed

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
    • From: "W. E. Perry" <wperry@f...>

• Prev by Date: assigning semantics to XML, Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
• Next by Date: Re: assigning semantics to XML, Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
• Previous by thread: Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
• Next by thread: Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread