Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
On Tue, Aug 20, 2002 at 03:05:28PM +0200, Erik Wilde wrote: > AndrewWatt2000@a... wrote: > > I hesitate to comment on this having twice had my knuckles rapped this > > week - by Tim Bray and Norman Walsh - for believing what a W3C Rec > > states... :) ... but the Namespace in XML Recommendation seems to say > > the opposite to what you "repeat, ad nauseam": > > i guess the infoset gets it just right by defining that namespace > declarations are in fact attributes, but special attributes. telling > people that namespace declarations are not attributes seems to be > motivated (at least i think so) by the attempt to save people from poor > implementations which are not smart enough to see namespace declarations > as special attributes (and maybe they should even complain if people try > to create 'regular' attributes which appear to have namespace > declaration syntax). My view is that there is simply a terminology overlapping, sometimes "attribute" means attribute at a serialization level, and sometimes "attribute" means a parsed representation of an attribute (for DOM or the Infoset). The namespace REC simply state that at a serialization level the mechanism used is attributes, but the internal representation of an parsed namespace information is usually not the one of a simple attribute, that's all ... Daniel -- Daniel Veillard | Red Hat Network https://rhn.redhat.com/ veillard@r... | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/ http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/
|
