[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: uche.ogbuji@f...
• Subject: Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
• From: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>
• Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2002 10:17:42 +0100
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <E17aUQ5-0005L1-00@m...> (message from Uche Ogbuji onThu, 01 Aug 2002 22:51:48 -0600)
• References: <E17aUQ5-0005L1-00@m...>

> As I've already said, the definition of a global attribute is not important.

what's in a name.
A proposal was made, some people commented that that proposal would have
a possibly undesirable affect on global atributes.
You and Simon stated it wouldn't have any affect on global attributes.

It turns out that you are not using the definition of "global attribute"
from the namespace spec. It's not that your definition is bad it's just
confusing to discus a spec using different meanings for the terms
defined in the spec.

David




_____________________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet
delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further
information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp or alternatively call
Star Internet for details on the Virus Scanning Service.

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
    • From: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@f...>
  • Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• References:
  • Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
    • From: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@f...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Global/Local attributes
• Next by Date: wrong Sean was RE: Markup perspective not code (wasRE: Re: URIs, concrete)
• 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