[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: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>
• Subject: Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
• From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2002 13:12:28 -0400
• Cc: uche.ogbuji@f..., xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <200208011653.RAA08283@n...>

David Carlisle writes:
> The proposed change says to consider unprefixed attributes as being in
> a namespace, so either they become global, or the above rule has to
> change (to some as yet unspecified alternative).

I think this may be the heart of the communications problem.

My proposal DOES NOT state that local attributes should be treated as
global attributes.  It says that local attributes should be treated as
if they have the namespace of the containing element, rather than
floating in ambiguous semi-local-land.

Among other things, that ambiguity has given us such atrocities as WXS's
extension of this mess to elements.

-- 
Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
    • From: "Aaron Skonnard" <aarons@d...>

• References:
  • Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
    • From: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
• Next by Date: Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask thequestion)
• 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