[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask thequestion)

• To: <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask thequestion)
• From: Norman Gray <norman@a...>
• Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2002 12:06:18 +0100 (BST)
• In-reply-to: <200208020144.g721iV302017@d...>

Greetings,

On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Joe English wrote:

> David Carlisle  wrote:
> > in other words the phrase "global attribute" and "attribute in a
> > namespace" currently mean the same thing. which is why several people
> > have commented that unless you furher qualify something, a change that
> > puts unprefixed attributes into the namespace of their elements
> > will make them global attributes.
>
> That's entirely true.  However, after re-re-reading [XMLNS]
> A.1 "The Insufficiency of the Traditional Namespace" and
> A.2 "XML Namespace Partitions" several times, I'm coming
> to the conclusion that this entire section is essentially
> meaningless.  At most, it indicates a "Best Common Practice."

Hear, hear.  Appendix A has _never_ made any sense, and appears as
nothing more than a hobby-horse that someone has managed to back into
the spec.  It doesn't even indicate best-practice, since all it says
is that "`global attributes' are proctological ones (to use Joe's
term): they are commonly observed to occur in a variety of
applications".

There are no deductions you can make about the behaviour or semantics of
`global attributes' based on the text of this appendix.  In particular,
I do not believe you can deduce (as David wants to do) that a `global
attribute' is valid on any element in the same namespace.  The spec
says nothing about which attributes are valid where.

The term `global attribute' adds nothing, and thus the worry about
whether something is a `global attribute' or not appears not to
matter.  An attribute is in a namespace or it isn't; if it is then
it's subject to generic namespace processing; if it's not, it isn't.

The only question that matters is:
   What is the rule for determining the namespace of an attribute?

The spec's rule is an evasive one; Simon's edit does not affect the rule,
but consists of suggested behaviour for applications; the whole problem
would largely disappear if default namespaces disappeared.  (is that
correct?)

All the best,

Norman


-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Norman Gray                        http://www.astro.gla.ac.uk/users/norman/
Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, UK     norman@a...

• References:
  • Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
    • From: Joe English <jenglish@f...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask thequestion)
• Next by Date: RE: Global/Local attributes
• 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