Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
----- Original Message ----- From: "David Carlisle" <davidc@n...> => > > > However, I would think that in the case above that "attr2" should belong to > > the default namespace, not the namespace that "elem2" belongs to. > > I don't see why. > Even if you thought that would have been a better design in the > beginning it is a far more radical change than Simon has proposed and > would break nearly all existing uses of attributes. > The overwhelming majority of attributes in existing document are > unprefixed. You would change the way _all_ these are reported. I agree. It is a radical change. However, the reasoning behind it was that you currently have no way of using attributes defined in the default namespace, which seems counter-intuitive to me. In the end, however, I agree with Dare that the better thing would be to get rid of default namespaces. In some ways, my use of the ":" did the same thing, but his solution is much cleaner, simpler, and 100% compatible with the current Rec. --- Seairth Jacobs seairth@s...
|
