• From: "bryan rasmussen" <rasmussen.bryan@g...>
• To: "Michael Kay" <mike@s...>
• Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 11:40:18 +0100

>
> No, it's not. Well-formedness is defined in the XML specification, and this
> doesn't know anything about namespaces;

Not exactly, it knows some things about Namespaces but not enough to
specify semantic matching - I think it's sort of weird that. Things
that it knows that I can remember:

1. : should be used in definition of namespaces.

2. XML or xml is reserved. I don't think xmlns is defined as a
namespace declaration anywhere but it seems sort of implied.

Cheers,

Bryan Rasmussen

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Element equivalence under XML Namespaces
    • From: Robin Berjon <robin@j...>
  • Re: Element equivalence under XML Namespaces
    • From: "bryan rasmussen" <rasmussen.bryan@g...>

• References:
  • Element equivalence under XML Namespaces
    • From: Matthew Van Gundy <matt-xmldev@s...>
  • RE: Element equivalence under XML Namespaces
    • From: "Michael Kay" <mike@s...>