[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: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
• From: Richard Tobin <richard@c...>
• Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2002 17:11:12 +0100 (BST)
• Cc:
• In-reply-to: <200208031525.g73FPIBm075552@c...>
• Organization: HCRC, University of Edinburgh

In article <200208031525.g73FPIBm075552@c...> you write:

>  "The use of relative URI references in namespace declarations is
>   deprecated. Future W3C specifications will define no interpretation
>   for them."

>However it fails to mention that there is at least one relative URI reference
>that cannot be forbidden: the empty string.

I'm not sure what you're getting at here.  The empty string is used to
undeclare the default namespace (and in 1.1, prefixes too), so it
can't possibly be used as a namespace name.

This is already implicit in the unamended spec, but an erratum making
it explicit will shortly be published.

-- Richard

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
    • From: Mike Brown <mike@s...>

• References:
  • Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
    • From: Mike Brown <mike@s...>

• Prev by Date: relying on ordering of sibling XML elements
• Next by Date: 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