• From: Tatu Saloranta <cowtowncoder@y...>
• To: xml dev <xml-dev@l...>
• Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 15:54:22 -0700 (PDT)

--- juanrgonzaleza@c... wrote:

...
> Just some days ago some people at this list
> discussed contradictory points
> of view about PIs, and reserved names. This week
> some claim that
> 'xml-stylesheet' is reserved other claim just the
> contrary. What is your

If you truly want to find out, you need to read 2
specifications:

* XML specification itself
(http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/)
* XML Namespaces spec
(http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml-names/) 

This will clear the issue for you.

For what it's worth, yes, all fully-qualified names
starting with (case-insensitive) prefix 'xml', are
indeed reserved (as per xml 1.0 specification).
Reserved does not mean illegal (as in fatal error,
non-wellformed), just that the meaning of such names
may change with later xml(-related) specifications.
Using local names that start with the same, but have
also a namespace prefix, is discouraged (since they
would become reserved if no namespace prefix was used
-- see Namespaces in XML spec).
Reserved does not lead to a fatal error (Namespaces
spec).

Separate from above, processing instruction target can
not be 'xml' (case insensitive) -- that is a
well-formedness error (fatal, from xml 1.0).

And thus, 'xml-stylesheet' name is reserved and its
semantics defined by an xml specification that was
finalized after xml 1.0 spec itself.

-+ Tatu +-



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

• References:
  • RE: processing instruction with 'xml' target
    • From: <juanrgonzaleza@c...>